Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Short C-5 Take Off  
User currently offlineBeau222 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 117 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5211 times:

Allthough threre sounds like a lot of power, I really am impressed with the amount of surface area that just lifts it up fast....

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f58_1200353756

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineYOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4906 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 5204 times:

Whoa that was crazy. That seemed like a ridiculously short run for takeoff!

YOWza



12A whenever possible.
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 5190 times:

I could be wrong, but it seemed to me its MLG lifted off just short of 5,000 feet from the start of the t/o run. Impressive, yes. But if it were empty, and if this were an airshow chances are it was, I would think it could do better than that.


My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineMark5388916 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5176 times:



Quoting YOWza (Reply 1):

I think its not bad.... i've been impressed by the C-17 take-off at my "home" airport of RAL (Riverside Muni)



 Smile Mark



I Love ONT and SNA, the good So Cal Airports! URL Removed as required by mod
User currently offlineNite92 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 48 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5111 times:

Having ridden in the back of many fully loaded C5's...I can tell you that thing was empty of both cargo and probably just a basic load of fuel.

Stuff 76 pax, 3 H-3's, and all the support equipment necessary for a 2 week overseas deployment, and it makes for a *very* long take off run. Especially on those nice hot and humid days at Andrews AFB. Nothing like sitting in the back going, any minute now....any....minute....now....ANY TIME YOU WANNA FLY AIRPLANE! Honestly that's how I felt one flight. I couldn't be sure, but I think we used 10,000 foot of the 11,700 available that day!


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6515 posts, RR: 54
Reply 5, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4954 times:



Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 2):
but it seemed to me its MLG lifted off just short of 5,000 feet from the start of the t/o run. Impressive

Empty and with 90% empty fuel tanks it should do a lot better than 5,000 feet. Otherwise it would never do it on 10,000 feet when put to work.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4730 times:



Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 5):
Empty and with 90% empty fuel tanks it should do a lot better than 5,000 feet.

That was my whole point (assuming, of course, the video showed a nearly empty C-5 taking off).

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 5):
Otherwise it would never do it on 10,000 feet when put to work.

I haven't bothered to confirm, but I think at MTOW, the big beast actually uses closer to 11,000 feet to get its hulk airborne.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineMDorBust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4716 times:

The C-5 video is not from an airshow.

That is from President Bushs July 2005 G8 summit, and is one of two C-5s that carried his motorcade to Prestwick.


User currently offlineWannabe From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 677 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4551 times:

Here is a much more impressive departure. This was at an airshow in 2003 at SWF (Stewart Airport, Newburg, NY.)
This flight was empty and lightly fueled, and was off the ground in much less than 5000'. More impressive is the right turn right after departure. Although I did not film this, I was at this airshow and almost at the same location. It was one of the most dramatic departures I have ever seen.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=08xDA2PSSWA


User currently offlineMark5388916 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 10 months 2 weeks ago) and read 4532 times:

Embed version:



VERY NICE though...

Mark



I Love ONT and SNA, the good So Cal Airports! URL Removed as required by mod
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29813 posts, RR: 58
Reply 10, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4523 times:



Quoting MDorBust (Reply 7):
That is from President Bushs July 2005 G8 summit, and is one of two C-5s that carried his motorcade to Prestwick

That isn't exactly a heavy load then, the bloody think is supposed to carry to M-1's.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineXC5Eng From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4418 times:

You can get it off the ground on short fields with a load by using 62.5% flaps but there better not be any obstacles! At 62.5% she climbs like a pig! If you need to get off the ground quick you set 62.5 % then as you climb out go to 40%. Very rarely used! The only time I did it is when we were on a Spec Ops mission.

User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6515 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4385 times:

At MTOW the C-17 has an unimpressive power to weight ratio of 0.277. That is almost identical to (but slightly inferior to) an Airbus 340-600 with 0.278. Anyway it will probably at MTOW beat the A346 by a small margin due to its more lift than speed optimized wing airfoil section and state of the art high lift devices.

When empty it is an entirely different story since the C-17 can be loaded to way over twice its empty weight.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 6):
...I think at MTOW, the big beast actually uses closer to 11,000 feet to get its hulk airborne.

It depends very much upon temperature and runway elevation. At sea level and ISA temp it will hardly ever need that much concrete, but as temp and elevation rises, then everything is possible until wheel speed limit.

For very heavy and long flights from not too long runways I would assume that it would take off at way less than MTOW with reduced fuel load, and then visit a tanker pretty soon. That capability makes it a very capable aircraft.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineFlybulldog From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4284 times:

Does anyone have pictures of the upper-deck area of the C5? I've searched all the photos and there's no pictures of the upper deck.

User currently offlineXC5Eng From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4273 times:



Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 6):
I haven't bothered to confirm, but I think at MTOW, the big beast actually uses closer to 11,000 feet to get its hulk airborne.

Like Prebennorholm said, it depends upon atmospheric conditions. Temperature and pressure altitude has a lot to do with engine performance. In very hot areas and higher pressure altitude we would need long runways (10,000 ft +). However, if it was very cold and/or at SL we could get off the ground on 8000 ft. runways at 769,000 lbs. all day long.


User currently offlineCaptOveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4268 times:



Quoting Flybulldog (Reply 13):
Does anyone have pictures of the upper-deck area of the C5? I've searched all the photos and there's no pictures of the upper deck.

I know what you mean.. I have been up there once when I was little and I can't find a single photo to confirm what I remember.. It was kind of fascinating... bunks, several rows of seats, no windows.


User currently offlinePapoose From Italy, joined Sep 2006, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 3823 times:

Thanks god they don't replace the engines...

User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 3808 times:



Quoting Flybulldog (Reply 13):
Does anyone have pictures of the upper-deck area of the C5? I've searched all the photos and there's no pictures of the upper deck.

I've seen one right here in the a.net database. I couldn't tell you the search criteria to use though.  Smile



Airliners.net Moderator Team
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Short C-5 Take Off
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...
Executive Decision F-117 Take Off Sene posted Fri Mar 24 2006 01:05:46 by 747400sp
Ingress Of Usmc Vertical Take Off Aircraft posted Sat Mar 18 2006 14:13:23 by CTR
Does F-18 Take Off With Speedbrake Extended? posted Thu Dec 15 2005 21:08:00 by Lemmy
Landing And Take Off posted Mon May 2 2005 22:45:50 by EMBQA
Fighter Take-off Question posted Sat Apr 9 2005 05:50:45 by Sprout5199
Did Space Ship One Take Off On Its Own Power... posted Thu Dec 16 2004 15:56:35 by Duke
New Jets Too Heavy For Take Off posted Sun May 16 2004 11:56:22 by EZYAirbus
B52s Take Off posted Fri Mar 21 2003 11:07:41 by Gc
A-10 Take-off Run posted Sun Feb 23 2003 19:20:31 by Tu144d
Aircraft Carrier Take-off Speed posted Thu Oct 11 2001 02:16:35 by Crank
Swing Wing Aircraft Take Off / Landing? posted Sat Mar 24 2012 21:26:49 by Max Q
Boeing Pulse Jet Vertical Take-off Concept posted Sat Jul 23 2011 10:12:51 by kanban
Why No Buzz Saw Sound, When C-17s Take Off? posted Wed May 4 2011 14:23:22 by 747400sp
Awesome F-14 Barrer/A-10 Low Take Off Video posted Sun Feb 25 2007 05:35:21 by CF188A
Executive Decision F-117 Take Off Sene posted Fri Mar 24 2006 01:05:46 by 747400sp
Ingress Of Usmc Vertical Take Off Aircraft posted Sat Mar 18 2006 14:13:23 by CTR
Does F-18 Take Off With Speedbrake Extended? posted Thu Dec 15 2005 21:08:00 by Lemmy
Landing And Take Off posted Mon May 2 2005 22:45:50 by EMBQA
Fighter Take-off Question posted Sat Apr 9 2005 05:50:45 by Sprout5199
Did Space Ship One Take Off On Its Own Power... posted Thu Dec 16 2004 15:56:35 by Duke

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format