Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why The Usaf Did Not Rengine The C-141 Starlifter  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3504 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5307 times:

Why the USAF did not rengine the Lockheed C-141 with CFM 56-2 two replace there P&W TF 33. They could have kept them longer.

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDuce50boom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5296 times:

The problem with the 141 wasn't it's engines, although those TF-33s were pieces of $hit compared to newer models. The prob was the life span left in the 141. They were originally designed for 15K hours IIRC. They ended up going to around 40-45K. The low levels trashed them, and the gulf war was the coffin cover.

They didn't re-engine them because there's no point to spending a billion or two for a new engine on an airplane you're about to retire


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5281 times:

Quoting Duce50boom (Reply 1):
The prob was the life span left in the 141. They were originally designed for 15K hours IIRC. They ended up going to around 40-45K.

They also had the same cross section as the C-130, which limited some of the loads they could carry.

The aircraft was originally designed to replaced the Air Forces C-133 which was the air forces Minuteman missle carrier. The aircraft was designed to haul that payload, and it turned out that the aircraft had a lot of spare lifiting capacity when hauling more normal payloads....That is why in the early 1980s they went ahead and lengthened all off them to the B configuration.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5236 times:

Remember, the 141's have been around since before 'Nam, and have been worked like dogs since...unlike the B-52, you unfortunately couldn't stretch the airframe for much longer...new coats of paint only go so far  Wink

Anyone know when the final flight of the Starlifter will be?

DeltaGuy


User currently offlineGalaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 621 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5223 times:

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 3):
Anyone know when the final flight of the Starlifter will be?

66-0177 will fly its final flight on 6 May 2006.

Go here for the starlifter farewell site: http://www.starlifterfarewell.com/

And yes, they were not re-engined due to the fact the plane had no airframe life left. The reason why they are re-engining the C-5 is because it has 80 to 90 % of airframe life left in it. Just like the 135s, they had enough airframe life to be cost effective enough to go ahead and modernize the planes.


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5186 times:

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 4):
The reason why they are re-engining the C-5 is because it has 80 to 90 % of airframe life left in it.

You mean you don't count airframe hours when they're up on jacks?!

It's sad to see the starlifters go, but on the bright side, 10 of their engines are going to NASA for improvement to their WB-57 fleet.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5159 times:

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 5):
10 of their engines are going to NASA for improvement to their WB-57 fleet.

Now that's an amazing thing, seeing those babies still flying.

DeltaGuy


User currently offlineGhostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5068 times:

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 3):
Remember, the 141's have been around since before 'Nam, and have been worked like dogs since...unlike the B-52, you unfortunately couldn't stretch the airframe for much longer...new coats of paint only go so far

LOL! Beautifully phrased  Wink

Will be a sad day when the last Starlifter goes to pasture. I just fell in love with the old C-141A model when I saw one at Mildenhall many many years ago, and I just love the sound of those old turbofans winding up and echoing for miles around.

 ghost 



"I chase my dreams but I never seem to arrive"
User currently offlineGunships From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 574 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5033 times:

I spent over twenty years in the USAF, most of that time as a C-141 crew chief. The earlier posts are exactly right concerning the airframe. Just not cost effective to put new motors on. Though it would be nice to still see them flying...

Don't know if any of you have had the chance to see it, but the last C-141 (177) brought home some of (if not the) first POW's from Vietnam. The aircraft is known as the "Hanoi Taxi". The sides of the cargo box have pictures of "Operation Homecoming" and there are signatures from some of the POW's on the panel that covers the troop LOX heat exchanger, just above the troop LOX quantity indicators. They have placed a plexiglass-type cover over the signatures to help preserve them.
There are also pictures of POW's being flown home from the Gulf war on it also.

If you ever get the chance to see this aircraft, don't miss it. I believe it will go on permanent display at the Air Force museum. The guys and girls from Wright-Patterson have done an amazing job with this aircraft.


User currently offlineDuce50boom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4976 times:

Gunships, the 141 you're referring to came to KSUU for our airshow in october. Very humbling to see that plane up close, inside out. A whole lot of history about it, and the loads were cool as cucumbers with showing me around (technically off limits cause of power/cargo door stuff). All in all, an amazing part of history I finally got to catch. Only regret was I didn't bring my camera.

User currently offlineGunships From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 574 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4920 times:

KSUU was where I saw it also, just before I retired.

I agree the crew was awesome, they kept pointing things out to me and answered all my questions.

It was the last C-141 I've set foot on, and being an ex-141 Crew Chief, it's kind of a special memory.

It had flown to KSUU from Wright-Pat. and spent the night before continuing on to Hickam. I just got lucky and happened to be working at the time the crew showed to get ready to go.

Quoting Duce50boom (Reply 9):
Only regret was I didn't bring my camera.

Wish I would have had mine with me too, but I didn't find out about it until after I started my shift...


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Why The Usaf Did Not Rengine The C-141 Starlifter
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Changes The Usaf Make To The KC-135E TF-33 posted Fri Sep 15 2006 02:03:34 by 747400sp
Why The USAF Never Bought F-14 Tomcat? posted Thu May 11 2006 01:33:54 by 747400sp
Why So Many People In The USAF Dislike C-5? posted Sun May 7 2006 00:31:24 by 747400sp
Why The Usaf Cancel The YC-14 & YC-15 posted Tue Feb 21 2006 00:19:19 by 747400sp
When Did The Usaf Retire There B 47 Fleet. posted Fri Aug 29 2003 22:31:30 by 747400sp
Why No Military Name For The JT8-D? posted Wed Aug 2 2006 01:37:35 by 747400sp
Should The USAF Build A B-2B? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 10:33:17 by KC135TopBoom
Question About The Usaf 744 ABL posted Fri Jun 9 2006 16:17:33 by Na
Usaf Retires Last C-141 Starlifter posted Sun May 7 2006 18:04:15 by Boeing nut
Is The B-52 Is One The Best USAF Planes Ever? posted Thu Apr 27 2006 19:30:27 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format