Bucky707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1028 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Fox just had a live view. Cockpit/forward section broke free and I did not see the tail. But looks like a survivable crash. Hopefully all the crew members are alive and well.
Longhaulheavy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 402 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
First pics are just coming in on Fox. It's not on fire, but it's broken in half. It looks like it separated at the joint/seam for the front cargo hatch.
Diamond From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3279 posts, RR: 66 Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
N328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6222 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
1. By what logic did the moderators decide to get rid of the thread with 40 posts, in favor of this one?
2. Does this mean that, if more C-17s are ordered, that we will see an extra one or two added to compensate for this C-5 loss?
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
SLCPilot From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 526 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
I don't know if this was mentioned in the other thread, but it seems like there is soot (or at least a stream of something) coming from the leading edge by the missing engine. Is there any official (non-official) word on the difficulties the plane was having prior to the crash?
Fly Safe!
SLCPilot
I don't like to be fueled by anger, I don't like to be fooled by lust...
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2529 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 7): 2. Does this mean that, if more C-17s are ordered, that we will see an extra one or two added to compensate for this C-5 loss?
I guess this is one way to get Congress to give you more funds.
United787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2342 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
All appear to have survived, I hope none of the injuries are serious.
Jonvesi From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 11 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
04/03/2006 short quote from an article (sorry lost link to this one)
“I can confirm that they [DAFB] are reporting engine failure,” the pentagon spokeswoman said. “The initial suspicion in cases like that is birds. It’s something investigators always look at. It’s a known cause of engine failure.”
Jonvesi From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 11 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Looks Like C-5B 84-0059 tail# 40049 nose# 4059 assigned 436 MAW Dover, in 1990
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9286 posts, RR: 13 Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Looking at those picture all I can say is that was one outstanding job by the crew bringing her down in one piece and all surviving... and to land in a field...!!!
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Thank God there appears to be no deaths. It looks like the airplane did fairly well in the crash, in that there are a few distinct pieces and there doesn't appear to have been a serious fire.
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 10): I guess this is one way to get Congress to give you more funds.
Dude, that's only funny with there being noone dead.
Cadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9081 posts, RR: 34 Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 17): Dude, that's only funny with there being noone dead.
No one is....
Also, construction of the c5 ended in the 90's, they dont make anymore IIRC.... as for the record, the NEWEST C5 at CEF is 25 years...
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
Cadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9081 posts, RR: 34 Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting RG828 (Reply 19): Can you patch up something the size of that?
tha'd be a BIG patch....
no, the aircraft is a w/o now its future lies in the hands of thousands of alcoholics... mmmm beer
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9286 posts, RR: 13 Reply 20, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 20): Anyone find it strange that the tail is not attached to the airplane and nowhere to be seen in any of the pictures?
No. I'm sure they hit hard and it broke off the tail and it's back on the runway. Notice the damage to the slates around the #1 engine.. I'm guessing they hit a light tower or something which knocked off the engine. Also notice the fire damage on-top the wing.
[Edited 2006-04-03 21:46:23]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
Jonvesi From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 11 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Aerial videos, show the tail, about 1000 meters to the right ( east?) of the impact point, off the approach end of the runway 32. Tail is in the same field, which used to be a potato farm.
Checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 996 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting EMBQA (Reply 22): No. I'm sure they hit hard and it broke off the tail and it's back on the runway. Notice the damage to the slates around the #1 engine.. I'm guessing they hit a light tower or something which knocked off the engine. Also notice the fire damage on-top the wing.
The tail section is behind the AC in the field. The aircraft was on final for the runway, not on take-off. The only engine that is off the aircraft is because of its own impact with dirt.
Checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 996 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Normally it should easily fly on the other three which is why I think there were other circumstances. SOP would be to head out to a safe area, dump down to landing weight and then return. When I was going through Dover once we taxiied out to the runway, ran up the power and there was this god awful noise. The engines spooled down and we didn't leave that night. Crew chief told us that the #3 reverser broke and deployed full open. Said we could have crashed had it happened during or after take-off. I almost wonder if thats what happened here. Guess we'll see.
-Check
25 EMBQA: Was he on final, or did he go off the end of the runway while trying to land again..?
26 Bushpilot: Great work by the flight crew. Sounds like a bird strike in the engine caused a flameout and they were coming back around to land. I am impressed the
27 Checksixx: On final. If you view video of the aircraft or photo's you can clearly see that it just didn't make the runway. I would guess that the impact is what
28 JBirdAV8r: Not to mention a bird strike could have not only killed #2, but damaged one or more others. From the pics I've seen it doesn't look like there's any
29 2H4: Isn't it likely we'll never know what happened, since military accident reports and investigations are classified? 2H4
30 Galaxy5: Well, i just got news of this, i am in japan right now on a mission but made a call and got some info, it was a reserve crew out of dover, they had en
31 EMBQA: There not classified. There just not released to the general public like the NTSB does. If you want a copy I'm sure you can get one through the Freed
32 2H4: Interesting. Thanks for mentioning that, EMB. 2H4
33 Galaxy5: Some more news, a few of the crew do have some bad injuries, like crushed pelvis and back/neck injuries, but not life threatening. Also preliminaries
34 Diamond: The 'logic' you are inquiring about are basic forum rules. Once a thread topic is started, it should not be duplicated by another thread. There were
35 AirRyan: We're not talking T-38 engines here, it usually would take an entire "flock of seagulls" or something of the like to turn one of those engines off.
37 Lt-AWACS: Don't underestimate birds! For example, The only US E-3 crash was due to a flock of Canadian Geese. It can happen, but the new BASH programs have redu
38 L-188: Lets see here, You had the Hanoi crash with all the orphans on board in the 1960's, The crash at Rein Mein and this one....I think I am missing a hull
39 Lehpron: I don't get it, how did the nose section separate? If it did a belly landing and the left wingtip caught ground, I understand the spinning around, but
40 Jimpop: To me, an untrained aviation follower, it looks like the nose is still in-line with the runway. This suggests, to me, that the force of impact along
41 PWM2TXLHopper: I think it's safe to say that this one is going to be a write-off. Oppps. "Another one's down, another one's down, another one bites the dust.."[Edit
42 StealthZ: That was Saigon, coincidentally almost to the day April 4th 1975(would have been April 3rd back in the States) Ramstein Was there not an earlier cras
43 Wingnut135: I had this posted in one of the other treads. Here is a list of all the airframe losses in its 30+ year history. http://www.globalsecurity.org/militar
44 StealthZ: " target=_blank>http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...s.htm On the ball those GlobalSecurity.org folks, that list includes yesterdays accident at Dov
45 NA: There are 3 photos of the crashed Galaxy in the database, two of them show it in what appears like a striped test-paint-scheme to me: View Large View
46 Vzlet: Summaries of USAF accidents and incidents for each fiscal year are available on the Flying Safety Magazine's archive page. Each Jan/Feb issue summariz
47 Galaxy5007: Its called cheap fading paint. Its no test, just the way the paint has faded. The plane has since been painted from that picture. Although its pretty
48 XC5Eng: I believe, based on close up photos of the wreckage, this bird had the MWS (Missile Warning System) mod onboard. You can tell by the two nipples on ei
49 EWS: Where's the tail? Cant see any of the tail section in any of the photo's.. weird.. Glad everyone's out ok with minor injuries, however a sad loss for
50 XC5Eng: Tail is about two hundred yards back. [Edited 2006-04-04 21:40:15]
51 2H4: Hmm...looks as though an extremely hard landing broke the tail off, and the side-load on the nose gear later twisted the nose section off... 2H4
52 XC5Eng: I really think that the nose gear may have collapsed and dug in causing the nose to almost rail forward and not want to deviate from the forward mome
54 XC5Eng: You know I've been thinking about this and can't figure out why he couldn't make the runway. My guess is that #2 took a bird and disintergrated taking
55 2H4: Well, according to Galaxy, they were about 19,000 lbs (or less than 5%) below MTOW. He says an engine failure should have been a non-event, which sur
56 Jimpop: I stand correct on the tail location, I had heard a news report that stated the tail was near the end of the runway. Clearly that one picture shows it
57 XC5Eng: We always had to calculate a three engine climb to make sure that we could clear obsticles. Now, I'm not sure what runway they took off on, but there
58 Galaxy5007: The biggest thing I notice in the pictures is that the Flaps are @ 40%, instead of full down 100% for landing. I think they weren't paying attention t
59 Jimpop: One wing looks like 40% but not the other one. I think (again, I'm not an aircraft pilot/engr/mech) that this could be an indication of compensating
60 XC5Eng: You know, I think you are right! Looking closer, they are not at 100%... they do look like they are at 40%. However, if they were doing a 2 eng inop
61 Lt-AWACS: List of those on-board (what a crappy way to space A LOL) http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123018570 Survivor names, base and medical conditions ar
62 B747: The info I'm getting from a flying crewchief friend of mine at dover who spent the day at the hospital with his friend who was on the plane was that s
63 XC5Eng: Well in that case I don't understand why the flaps would be at 40%! From the looks of that crew roster, there was plenty of experience on that flight
64 LUVRSW: To me, those flaps look all the way down.
65 XC5Eng: No, they do go down further. I looked at the pics and compared to pics that I had during loading and pre-flight and they are a 40%. I wouldn't bet th
66 Galaxy5: Well, i went out and viewed the wreckage today, didn't get to up and close to it since it is cordonned off. But you can see quite a bit from the fence
67 Galaxy5: Also, there is no mechanical indication that the TRs opened on any engine. Also this was one of the Amp birds as well, and the amp'd aircraft are now
68 2H4: After the tail section broke off and the entire nose section separated? Go Lockheed! 2H4
69 Galaxy5: Well from what ive heard #2 had an TR indication either a pressure light or not locked light. The crew then shut it down. But there was no indication
70 Checksixx: Again..anyone that has a link to a NOTAM for Dover??
71 Galaxy5: Why? what do you want to know? they are still flying out of dover?
72 Checksixx: I'd like the link if you have it Galaxy5, if not don't worry about it. thanks Check
73 Checksixx: I'll use DINS. Thanks anyway. -Check
74 Checksixx: Found it...forgot all about DINS until after I asked..sorry. Data Current as of: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 01:30:00 GMT ---------------------------------------
75 Wingnut135: Just out of curiosity, what is AMP'd? Are those the ones with the digital fuel flow gages? Not an engine guy and sadly left the t-tail world almost t
76 Galaxy5: AMP is the new glass cockpit modification, Aircraft Modernization Program. The aircraft that crashed had the modification, and of course it may have b
77 KPDX: Some amazing pictures! What a massive thing! KPDX
78 XC5Eng: Wow! I would have bet that they shutdown two engines... I looked in section 3 of my OLD -1 and confirmed that 2 engines inop was a 40% flap approach
79 MissedApproach: Not necessarily. I'm not sure about USAF policy, but Canadian accident reports are routinely published in open sources. Coupled with the facts that t
80 L-188: Any chance they bled down? You beat me to that after I read the comment that they shut one down.
81 StealthZ: Ok.. firstly the disclaimer, I am an IT storage specialist so have no real knowledge of the mechanical attributes of aircraft flap systems, specifica
82 Galaxy5007: Flaps and slats are controlled through a series of torque tubes driven by a control manifold and two motors. There is no way for them to "bleed down"
83 XC5Eng: Just like Galaxy said. The flaps and slats are driven down by a series of jack screws. Sounds like a ride in the sim! Thinking more about what you sa
84 L-188: Ok, just was asking. I have seen A/C types (DC-6) parked for a couple of days, and the flaps slowly drop over a period of hours. Well I was just thin
85 XC5Eng: Well... the cockpit voice recorder and the MADARS tape will be able to tell the investigators a lot about what went on. Galaxy seems to know his stuff
86 Galaxy5007: I don't know why they had them at 40. Like I said, maybe the brakes fired and they couldn't move them. But knowing how heavy they were, you'd think th
87 XC5Eng: What about the airspeed indicator? Could they have been confused about what speed they were at? I know that still doesn't answer why flaps were at 40
88 2H4: What about the aforementioned 2-engine-out scenario? 2H4
89 SCEagle: I sincerely hope that we don't have aircrews flying aircraft and aren't familiar enough with the instrumentation to know the aircraft's airspeed.
90 2H4: That wasn't my quote, but with regard to your statement, human error doesn't care how familiar or proficient the pilot is. 2H4
91 XC5Eng: I agree! But... like Galaxy stated earlier, this bird had the AMP mod. That would have given them a glass cockpit. That would have been one of the fi
92 Seefivein: could the recent time change have something to do with it?? was it dark when this happened? maybe flying back into the sunrise? jus asking
93 N1641: if you only had 2 engines would you want less flaps for less drag?
95 Galaxy5007: They had 3 engines up, dispite news reports. Only No.2 was shut down. Airspeed was definately the cause of the accident if you ask me. The crews have
96 XC5Eng: Well I guess what you are saying is that the AMP mod is probably not a contributing factor. I've tried to give the crew the benefit of the doubt by tr
97 2H4: What were the weather conditions at the time of the accident? Was weather a factor at all? Historically, tail-first ground contact has been the unfor
98 Galaxy5007: Weather was fine. Fair skies, 5-10 mph winds from the south. Although he had the wind at his tail, I don't think weather had any contribution. I hate
99 2H4: Galaxy5007 and XC5Eng....thanks for a great discussion. Despite other's attempts to steer the thread elsewhere, you two have brought some great, educ
100 XC5Eng: I hate to say it, but you're right. "Task Saturation", has brought more planes down since the Wright brothers than any other factor! Hey no problem.
101 Galaxy5007: I love the C-5, and I like talking about the plane. As a bubblechaser on the plane here @ Dover, I enjoy working on it and learning new things everyda
102 Wannabe: In a conversation with a former C-5 pilot yesterday, he stated that flaps at 40% would be wrong for a 1 engine out scenario, but that the accepted pro
103 Galaxy5007: They didn't have any problems until 10 min into flight. They had the gears and what not retracted
104 Wingnut135: One more question about the AMP issue. I'm currently "down range" and there was a Wright-Pat tail on the ground here several weeks ago, don't remember
105 Galaxy5007: That actually is MADARS III. It isn't part of AMP, infact alot of the AMP birds kept MADARS II just because they weren't sure of 3 yet. The reason wh
106 Braud65: Here are some additional pictures. Some closeups and perpsective from the final approach to runway. www.wcbp.net/images/fc_5.htm Regards
107 XC5Eng: Yeah, He would have cleaned up the configuration moments after takeoff. Gear came up then flaps. Believe me, I above all, am trying to find an outsid
108 XC5Eng: I guess to answer your question...since I didn't earlier. Yes, he was correct. It is acceptable to leave configuration as is if a malfunction occurs
109 Seefivein: This was posted on the http://www.finescale.com/FSM/CS/forums/608829/ShowPost.aspx C-5 crash at Dover - the skinny This is the current skinny on the c
110 Galaxy5007: Considering I have driven around the entire crash site and evaluated the scene over and over again with pictures and actual views of the site, the ta
111 SCEagle: Sigh. This can't be right. They weren't familiar with the aircraft's systems?
113 XC5Eng: I'm on vacation right now, and out of the country typing from a mobile device. I can't add a lot to the dicussion right now. I can reiterate this, "pi
114 Galaxy5: I recently got some more pics but dont have the capability to post them. They are pretty good upclose and can help explain a bit more.
115 JetAv8r: Galaxy, Where did you stand to take the photos? I went down the musuem drive and stood on my car. There were cops all over Rt. 9. I've got a contracto
116 AnMCOSon: Why dose that crash remind me of something? Oh yeah, the Air America movie with Mel Gibson and Robert Downey Jr., when Robert Downey Jr.'s character c
117 Seefivein: Anyone heard anything on this lately? Seems to have been moved to the Hush Files!
119 Galaxy5007: No word yet on the investigation. As for the plane, the nose has been cut up, with the cab on a flatbed truck in the field. The plane has been stab ja
121 Galaxy5007: http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123019956 They have the best pictures right now in the news article that ironically got released...lol
122 XC5Eng: Wow... what a sight! I don't think we will be surprised with the results of the investigation.
123 UAL Bagsmasher: As of last week on 7-26-06, the fuselage and tail sections were still out in the field near where they came to rest. I snapped a few quick pics after
124 AirRyan: Here is the computer simulation of what happened - not enough leadership on the flightdeck and about as many people there as there were different page
125 Jhooper: obviously these guys are getting bashed for making some basic airmanship errors, but I think people go wrong when they assume something similar couldn
126 Seefivein: I will add again that the time change was also that weekend - so not only being woke up in the early morning , but, an hour lost too..
127 XC5Eng: Sorry guys, I just can't agree with that. There is NO excuse for a qualified crew to make those types of mistakes. That much rank and experience on th
128 Seefivein: any more pictures than these http://www.cargolaw.com/2006nightmare_c5-b.html[Edited 2006-09-04 00:35:12]
129 Wingnut135: Here's some more. http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123025736 Wingnut
130 Seefivein: Rumor has it that what is left there right now - is being cut up into pieces. anyone seen this ???? pics???
131 Galaxy5007: That remains a rumor. Very little activity has occured out on 59 for the past couple of months. Dover has been canning usable parts off of the hulk f
132 Seefivein: Any updates - is it still off limits?
133 USAFHummer: This month's Flying magazine has a great article summing up the crash and its causes... Greg
134 Galaxy5007: Hard to believe that its been a year since 4059 went down. It had a huge effect on Dover, and the C-5 Reputation(and then later the reserve air crews
135 TropicBird: Has the accident had any impact on the AMP or RERP programs? They are over budget and there is serious talk of cancelling the conversion of the "A" mo
136 Echster: I can't answer the first question because I don't know. Yes, they are overbudget by enough for the USAF to have to report it to Congress. I saw a quo
137 Galaxy5007: No. 4059s crash was not related to AMP, which was carefully looked at during the investigation. The conversion of the A-models is still probable for
138 SCAT15F: If it is a C-5B, I imagine they would have to order 1 or 2 C-17's to replace it, as it would have been included in the AMP/re-engineing program.
139 DeltaGuy: Whew..I saw the thread and thought it happened again. 2006 called, they want their thread back. DeltaGuy
140 KevinSmith: Oh come now be nice. The thread got some new life with the one year anniversary of the accident.
141 Jhooper: I personally don't agree with that statement, regardless of what the investigation found. All things being equal, I don't believe this accident would
142 Galaxy5007: The power setting is clear as day on AMP birds, it even has digital number next to the dial. You can't sit there and tell me that the power setting re
143 Jhooper: The fact that the pilots are at fault isn't in dispute, Silas. I'll have to reread my posts to see if that's what I implied, but I didn't mean to imp
144 Jhooper: I just want to add to the previous post that I am a fan of the AMP/RERP and I look forward to seeing the legacy planes upgraded and to improve their r
145 JohnM: Jhooper, You hit the nail on the head, you are 100% correct.
146 Galaxy5007: They should have used contrasting colors. I know they made them smaller because of the 4 engines. But I agree they could have done better with the des
147 XC5Eng: I agree! As a former FE on the C5, I can, without reservation, say that with taped instruments, someone on the flight deck would have noticed that th
148 Skyway1: What happened to the aircrew? Are they still flying?
149 Galaxy5007: No, the aircrew got punishments that were not publicly announced. None of the aircrew are flying. One of the FCCs on board is flying, while the other
150 Turbineguy: Well I can tell you that we have all made mistakes and some of us got away with them this air crew didn’t. But I don’t blame the aircrew I blame t
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 48 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2278 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3347 posts, 
From Norway, joined Sep 2001, 536 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Jan 2004, 582 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 4833 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
