Tb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1140 posts, RR: 4 Posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2155 times:
Saw Lockheed 99 heavy land the other day at Dover and it had some extra antenna's on it and the new engines. I read a little bit about the C-5M program. Is the USAF planning on doing the mod to all the C-5's left flying? That is a pretty awesome plane and I love watching them at the base! The blurb I saw on it said they see it flying until at least 2040!
Gatorman96 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 547 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2140 times:
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2114 times:
86-0013 apparently is at Dover for hanger space to do an inspection of everything. All of Lockheeds hangers are full of A-models getting fixed from cracks and what not. I got to see it on the ramp this weekend when we were up for a visit, never thought I'd see the day. Still has the orange test-dome on the nose, and it had checkerboard wing tips. Did anyone hear it? I didn't see the landing, I just so happened to spot it while on base.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2053 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1968 times:
Last I heard, the program was not going well. Costs are sky rocketing and it has gotten so bad the the USAF is considering re-engining only the B models and flat out retiring all other C-5's.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1841 times:
Part of the cost is only half the reasoning behind only doing the B and C models. The A-models are showing signs of cracking and fatigue in certain areas and the cost of money and time is killing the A-model fleet times in the air. The B-model testing is going fine. The A-model, 9024 is the jet with all the problems, and still hasn't flown its first flight, which should of happened back in December. As I said before, I see another 6-8 A models being converted, the 2 Cs and all the Bs.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
Litz From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1714 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1790 times:
Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 2): Did anyone hear it? I didn't see the landing, I just so happened to spot it while on base.
I've heard it flying around Marietta several times ... it sounds pretty much like a 747.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1859 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1737 times:
Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 4): Part of the cost is only half the reasoning behind only doing the B and C models. The A-models are showing signs of cracking and fatigue in certain areas and the cost of money and time is killing the A-model fleet times in the air. The B-model testing is going fine. The A-model, 9024 is the jet with all the problems, and still hasn't flown its first flight, which should of happened back in December. As I said before, I see another 6-8 A models being converted, the 2 Cs and all the Bs.
Our reserve unit here in San Antonio flies C-5As. I have to wonder what the replacement will be if the A models are put out to pasture. Is the C-17 line closed down or is there still time to buy additional C-17s to replace the C-5A? How many C-17s would be needed to compensate for the airlift capability lost with the grounding of the remainder of the C-5A fleet?
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1706 times:
With Lackland being the C-5 training base, I'm sure they would convert over to B models. I think Active Duty C-5s would go bye bye, and I posted this in a thread a couple of months ago of where they might go. Dover and Travis would just have another squadron of C-17s, as well as Wright-Patterson. Westover would be the primary C-5 base for the Reserve, while the ANG would have Martinsburg as the leader. Stewart and Memphis would lower thier fleet size, but stay in the game. Lackland would get rid of a couple of thier planes, maybe even down to 8, and continue the training there. C-17s aren't replacing the C-5. As long as there is some C-5s, the USAF will be alright. Its when it comes time to get rid of them all that they'll have to get a new aircraft to replace it....and I'd hate to see the cost of that! The thing is also, that they wouldn't just send good jets to the boneyard, they would work them 4 or 5 at a time, as they break hard for certain things they are breaking for(such as the contour box beam fitting) they would just restrict them severly, or even ground them until a batch of them are ready to go to AMARC. Lackland alone has 3 or 4 aircraft already restricted because of this problem. Heck, One even spent 11 months getting fixed, came back and now its waiting in line again to go back to depot for more repairs (0445). There is already at least 10 birds I'd put in the boneyard, and I can list them by tail number, lol.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
Echster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 396 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1699 times:
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 6): Our reserve unit here in San Antonio flies C-5As. I have to wonder what the replacement will be if the A models are put out to pasture. Is the C-17 line closed down or is there still time to buy additional C-17s to replace the C-5A? How many C-17s would be needed to compensate for the airlift capability lost with the grounding of the remainder of the C-5A fleet?
About the only thing we presently have to replace a C-5 is the C-17. The C-17 line is once again threatened with closure. Boeing says they need an order this FY or they're packing up the tooling. The President's budget included money for tooling storage. At a congressional hearing a few weeks ago, Senator Inouye says he thinks it's likely Congress will let the USAF retire the C-5As (except about 8). They'll likely take that money savings and place a C-17 order.
Another thing to look at, that was recently announced, is the Army and USMC are expanding. The USAF said they needed max 300 heavy lifters but with that expansion, 300 is now the minimum. Looking at the numbers, I think that means the USAF will get to the 222 C-17 number they've always wanted and leave them with about 80 C-5s. I know someone has better numbers, though.
The number of C-17s to C-5s I've always seen posted is 2:1. Not sure of the accuracy, but it seems about right to me. I can't speak for anyone else, but if the C-17 numbers go up and the C-5 numbers drop down, I'd like to see all the C-5s go to the USAFR and ANG. Not sure why, maybe I'm a little biased, but I think the maintenance folks with the reserve units do a better job of upkeep. The active units with C-5s can transition to the C-17, and the other units with C-17s can top up. I think a heavy squadron is 6 airframes. By topping up, I infer, a place like Hickam or March, with 8 x C-17s can get 12 airframes and have 2 squadrons.
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 571 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1689 times:
Quoting Echster (Reply 8): I think a heavy squadron is 6 airframes
It depends on the plane. Dover had 18 C-5s for each squadron here when we had 36 jets. Charleston has 4 squadrons for thier 52 planes, so they have 13 planes approx per squadron.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11025 posts, RR: 53 Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1473 times:
Quoting Echster (Reply 8): I'd like to see all the C-5s go to the USAFR and ANG. Not sure why, maybe I'm a little biased, but I think the maintenance folks with the reserve units do a better job of upkeep.
That is usually because the ANG & USAFR units have more time to spend working on their airplanes than the active duty units do. This is true for all types flown by the ANG, USAFR, and USAF units.
Echster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 396 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1443 times:
Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 9): It depends on the plane. Dover had 18 C-5s for each squadron here when we had 36 jets. Charleston has 4 squadrons for thier 52 planes, so they have 13 planes approx per squadron.
Thanks. Wasn't sure how the numbers broke down. I have been told 6 x C-17s per squadron for a reserve/guard unit but they ended up with 8 airframes each due to a number of reasons.
Echster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 396 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 month 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1281 times:
Lots of interesting info in this piece about C-17s, C-5s, and C-130s.
Boeing Makes Unsolicited Offer of C-17s To USAF
The deal could also force Congress to take a new position on the fate of the C-5 fleet. Air Force officials continue to say they will not be able to afford to buy new C-17s without relief from the legislative requirement to continue upgrading its oldest C-5 transports, a program that is accruing unforeseen cost increases.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1140 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
