Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airforce To Get Rid Of 14 C-5A's Starting Soon.  
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 24
Posted (12 years 6 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2358 times:

the airforce will sending 14 C-5A's to the bone yard soon. this i have heard from a reputable source. anyone else hear this yet?


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (12 years 6 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2224 times:

I have not heard that the C-5As are going to the boneyard. Right now the U.S.A.F. is upgrading its C-5B fleet but has yet to make a decision on the C-5As. From this weeks AW&ST

"Another issue that is likely to get attention is reengining C-5As. The Air Force is upgrading its C-5Bs, but has deferred a decision on what to do with its older C-5As. While one camp believes the C-5A's huge life capacity makes it worthwhile to upgrade, another argues it would make more financial sense to retire the aircraft that would be almost 40 years old when undergoing the upgrade."

There isn't an aicraft out there that can truly replace the C-5. So, it is my opinion that upgrading them would be the better decision. Now, if by retiring the C-5As, the service is allowed to purchase more C-17s, then I would say to go for it. But don't retire them and not replace them.



"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 6 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2210 times:

There is talk about the USAF's entire fleet of C-5s having their GE TF-39s replaced with GE CF6s

User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6287 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (12 years 6 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2193 times:

No notice at AMARC as of Firday afternoon. I'd bet against it as the -141s are filling space as quickly as thay can land.


Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2168 times:

Remember, the C5A was designed specifically to get large quanities of Cold War apparatus....tanks, helicopters, missiles....to Europe fast to counter a Soviet invasion. It was assumed that time was vital and a bigger aircraft (requiring large specialized infrastructure air bases) carrying more would speed needed resources to the battle front.

Tactical requirements have changed, as we've seen. Cargo transports need to be more versatile. There are few if any geopolitical hot spots (at least that require the United State's concern) that will see the kind of massive land campaign that was envisioned in central Europe during the latter half of the Cold War. Even the mighty M1 tank is rarely called upon anymore.

Of course all that could change....the Middle East is the obvious no-brainer. China is a growing might that so far has been able to resist regional aggression, but a Sino-US conflict would be predominately naval in its' infancy.

Replacing the C5 is obviously a back-burner issue right now. But a wise man would at least be doing some think-tanking over the issue.


User currently offlineB747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 245 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2163 times:

Hopefully they are smart, and send the troublemaking maintenance nightmares to the boneyard, and not just the 14 with the highest time on them.
Brian



At Pope, where not happy, until you're not happy!
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2162 times:

Unfortunately, that would leave the U.S.A.F without their "Heaviest" lifter and the one that can carry almost anything in the inventory. How about we field a new aircraft? Oh ya, that would cost a lot of money and the Democrats wouldn't go for it.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineSinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1645 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2147 times:

Will the upgraded C-5B's still be called the "B" or will it be called the C-5D?
Being that the C-5C is a special aircraft with a "gutted" cargo deck and the rear 2 level troop deck removed.



My Country can beat up your Country....
User currently offlineTurbineBeaver From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2128 times:

There is a C-5 sitting here in DAB right now for the President's visit. A total beauty. It has a RED stripe on the tail, anyone know what AFB that is??

TB


User currently offlineUSAir1489 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 364 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2126 times:

The structure of the C-5 still has a lot of life left in it. It's mainly the engines and avionics that need to be upgraded.

Steve



Zinger Aviation Delta Oscar Tango Charlie Oscar Mike
User currently offlineJohnM From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2103 times:

I have heard the same thing. Just read an article from the Early Bird that Uncle and Boeing are trying to work a deal for more of those goofy C-17s. Part of the deal would be to trash some C-5s and get more -17s. Biden has asked the AF to put -17s at Dover. I would be a good idea if the C-17 could do the job, but they are short legged as I'm sure you know. C-5s are screwed up, but the C-17 is not the answer in my opinion. BUT-if some C-5s have to go- I have several excellent suggestions as which ones to make into beer cans. I think Travis and Dover would loose airplanes, the AFRES/ANG guys aren't going to loose out. They are cheaper to run in the reserve component.

User currently offlineKc10boom From United States of America, joined May 2004, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2097 times:

I say good riddance to the A models


Why is it my best contacts are when no one else is looking!
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2087 times:

Welcome back! Big grin

LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2093 times:

KC10boom what do you know about the A-models any way? heck what do you know about C-5s at all. Well the rumor is now that the airforce is gonna do a wait and see if they will retire the first 12 ( they where the hand made ones) and the other 2 airframes will be choosen as needed. but replacing them with C-17s isnt the reason. a C-17 doesnt have the same capabilities that the C-5 has. First of all it doesnt have nearly the range as a C-5, secondly it doesnt have anywhere near the cargo capacity of the C-5. The C-17 reliability is such a political ploy that a congress hearing should be called out. Ive seen so many C-17 broken out in the system that it would make a grown man sick.


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineKC10Boom From United States of America, joined May 2004, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2074 times:

Dude, it was a joke. Apart from the fact that 3 out of the 4 times I was scheduled to refuel A model C-5's (Westover and Kelly jets) they canceled for maintenence, it's just a good natured joke. Like the one about what it means to visit Dover and not see any C-5's on jacks.......They must be out of jacks. I've seen many C-17's broke....Ramstein, Hickam, Yokota, the list goes on and on. Both airplanes (C-17 and the C-5) break alot. It's a fact of life. Just as sure as the sun coming up in the morning. If my comment offended you, I regret that. But it was a joke.

Mike

PS, thanks LY744!



Why is it my best contacts are when no one else is looking!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Airforce To Get Rid Of 14 C-5A's Starting Soon.
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...
Swedish Air Force To Get 2 C-17 Globemaster posted Wed Oct 4 2006 23:33:12 by Solnabo
Why So Long For A KC-135R To Get Into The Air? posted Sun Sep 10 2006 02:01:28 by 747400sp
Lybia To Get Eurocopter Tiger? posted Tue Aug 1 2006 16:27:34 by Flying-Tiger
What Is The Loudest Jet To Get Lunch Off A Carrier posted Wed Jul 26 2006 20:58:56 by 747400sp
"Orion" Said To Be Name Of NASA's CEV Program posted Fri Jul 21 2006 10:42:36 by AerospaceFan
Next AFB To Get C-17s? posted Wed Jun 14 2006 04:23:14 by Dacman
USAF Spec Ops To Get Pilatus PC-12 posted Thu May 25 2006 13:26:58 by Svenskpilot
Germany To Get F-15K To Replace There F-4. posted Sat Mar 25 2006 18:23:58 by 747400sp
US Marines Were Out To Get & Kill The F22 Raptor posted Tue Jan 3 2006 22:28:24 by Keesje
Canada To Get 16 New Transport Airrcraft posted Tue Nov 22 2005 21:07:36 by CO737800

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format