CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1635 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
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6201 posts, RR: 43 Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1604 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.
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1579 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.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1573 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
Sinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 1558 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.
TurbineBeaver From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1199 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1539 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??
USAir1489 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 363 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1537 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.
JohnM From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 310 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1514 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.
Kc10boom From United States of America, joined May 2004, 62 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1508 times:
I say good riddance to the A models
Why is it my best contacts are when no one else is looking!
Galaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 27 Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1504 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
KC10Boom From United States of America, joined May 2004, 62 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1485 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!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
