Galaxy5007
Topic Author
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:20 pm

I haven't found any news articles to post on here yet, but aircraft 69-0024 has arrived at Dover after being with Lockheed and depot teams for the past 7 years. After it was converted to a C-5M, it was sent to PDM, and is the first C-5M to be delivered with a fresh paint job.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7651
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:51 pm

Great! It is always a pleasure to hear about C-5Ms being delivered. Hopefully they will have a huge fleet of them someday.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Wed Sep 09, 2009 12:05 am



Quoting Galaxy5007 (Thread starter):
for the past 7 years.

Is that meant to be 7 months or has Lockheed been doing some long term testing on the airframe?
 
Galaxy5007
Topic Author
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:35 pm



Quoting Ozair (Reply 2):
Is that meant to be 7 months or has Lockheed been doing some long term testing on the airframe?

No 7 years was correct. I was stationed at Dover when we sent it to Lockheed in July of 2002. It went there as the prototype A model to be AMP modified. After it was AMP modified, it joined 5004 in pre-production AMP testing for two years. Then they started the production AMP @ Dover AFB, Starting with 6013, 6025 and 5003. All three jets went down to Lockheed after AMP mod...13 and 25 for RERP, and 5003 for flight testing. They took 5004 out of testing for torque deck repair, and 9024 had several issues that were being worked on (structural repairs, most of the A models have these issues). 5004 was then transferred to Dover (It belonged to Travis prior to AMP), and started OT&E with 5001, 4061, 5005, and 7045. 5003 joined the testing fleet near the end of testing. 9024 was finally inducted into RERP a year after the other two B models, and it took them nearly 16 months to modify it and is one of the primary reasons for the cost over runs.
83-1285 was sent down last month and inducted into production RERP, and will be the 4th aircraft to be converted.
On another note, All of the B and C models have been AMP modified, and they are half way through Lacklands 16 A models (either complete or undergoing that is).
 
HawaiianHobo
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 2:33 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:11 pm



Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 3):
All of the B and C models have been AMP modified, and they are half way through Lacklands 16 A models (either complete or undergoing that is).

Does the AMP process replace the old dial gauges on the fuel panel with digital ones or was that just strictly a B model thing? I haven't flown on 8213 in a while but last I remember she still had the old sticky FMP gauges and totalizer.
...
 
jhooper
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 8:27 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:45 am

Got to crawl through that one last week. Sweet!
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
 
Galaxy5007
Topic Author
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:14 am



Quoting HawaiianHobo (Reply 4):
Does the AMP process replace the old dial gauges on the fuel panel with digital ones or was that just strictly a B model thing? I haven't flown on 8213 in a while but last I remember she still had the old sticky FMP gauges and totalizer.

Unfortunately, no....AMP doesn't touch the fuel system. I'm not completely sure if they may have upgraded 9024 with the digital gauges or not...Maybe they upgraded them during RERP. I'll e-mail my buddy and see if he can find out for me.
 
JohnM
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:42 am

No, the legacy analog fuel quanity indicators remain in former A model jets. It was proposed to make them digital like the B's, but I think when the A RERP thing went down the tubes, they left them alone. The B models were horrible (fuel quan systems) when they were new, and I shudder to think how long it would take to iron out the bugs if this was done to an old A model that everyone has has thier way with for the last 40 years of so. Some aspects of digital fuel quanity are better in the C-5, but not a whole lot. The nice thing with an A is when it stops working, there is something seriously wrong, which can usually be found. The "B" F/Q system is just one big fault code waiting to happen, hard to duplicate, and results in parts getting thrown at it. Many times with mixed results.

The bottom line....thank God that L/M didn't get to "improve" that system for us!
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:20 pm

Question, when new production C-5B's were being built in the 1980's. why were CF-6 engines (well established in airline and indeed USAF service), not fitted then?
TF-39 was of course the first high bypass ration engine, the obvious choice back when the G-5A was under development, the choice was not there.
Then on the back of the C-5B production, they could have retrofitted the CF-6's on to the C-5A's.
 
Galaxy5007
Topic Author
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:08 pm



Quoting GDB (Reply 8):
Question, when new production C-5B's were being built in the 1980's. why were CF-6 engines (well established in airline and indeed USAF service), not fitted then?
TF-39 was of course the first high bypass ration engine, the obvious choice back when the G-5A was under development, the choice was not there.
Then on the back of the C-5B production, they could have retrofitted the CF-6's on to the C-5A's.

I would probably assume that your question can be answered by simply saying it wasn't necessary at the time. Fuel was cheap, and emission and noise standards didn't matter to military aircraft. now with all this "green talk" and people complaining about the noise the TF-39s make, and the reality of the trouble the engines were having at the time of the RERP program starting, it was just a needed change to improve the reliability of the plane. Now, the TF-39s aren't as unreliable after a TCTO (John, do you remember what it was exactly?) they did to them. Probably another reason why they left the As out of the loop. However, the hang time on the wings is still pretty low. They'll have plenty of spares with the B models not needing them anymore, and the retirements that are probably going to start next year with a dozen or so of the horrible A models that haven't flown in 6 months. On another note, there were ALOT of upgrades that the B model had when it was produced over the A model....most of those were needed because they were so troublesome on the A models (ie gears).
 
JohnM
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:03 am

Yea balls 007, the TCTO was the ht90 upgrade to the high pressure turbine. I am not a jet guy, so hopefully I'm not lying, but it allows an increase in TIT limits. I know lots of engines got dropped for getting close or busting it's TIT margins on the non modded engines. The TCTO has worked, and this problem has gone away. Can't remember (in years) that a motor got dropped for TIT limits. I think one of the best TCTOs to get done on the jet. Other than noise issues, and while not a hot rod, the TF-39 these days does well. We used to argue with jet guys about 4 or 5 deg C before the TCTO, thankfully those days are gone.
 
HawaiianHobo
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 2:33 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:43 am

I really hope that RERP fixes the bleed duct overheat indication issue that seems to (in my opinion) plague the C-5. I swear every mission I've been on this year we've had at least one leg and in some cases the entire trip, where we get an overheat light and wind up doing the dance of checking the "boiler room", looking out the windows at the pylons, and filling out 781's. Every time its just been indication, thank God, but the problem doesn't seem to be limited to hot environments like Iraq and Afghanistan. I've seen it pop up in places like Alaska too. Maybe it's just a Travis thing, but its definitely multiple tail numbers effected, 5010 being the worst offender IMO.

Quoting JohnM (Reply 7):
The "B" F/Q system is just one big fault code waiting to happen, hard to duplicate, and results in parts getting thrown at it.

Ugh, I remember. Soooo many hours spent on chasing E6 or E7 error codes, changing probes and replacing entire wiring harnesses. To the C-5s credit, that seems to be the ONLY troubling fuel system issue and its been getting better...unlike the KC-10.

Quoting JohnM (Reply 10):
Other than noise issues, and while not a hot rod, the TF-39 these days does well.

I'm gonna kinda miss the whine of those engines  Smile Atleast we have a few more ear deafening years with them.
...
 
jhooper
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 8:27 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:43 am



Quoting HawaiianHobo (Reply 11):
Maybe it's just a Travis thing, but its definitely multiple tail numbers effected, 5010 being the worst offender IMO.

Actually, "balls 7" is one of the worst offenders  Big grin 9007, not 5007. Had a bleed duct hot several times on that jet last month!
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
 
seefivein
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 12:52 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:09 am

The article does not mention a tail number, so i put the link here.

without the new engines - how many times would the C-5 be refueled - both ways to Turkey?



http://www.amc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123180500
 
Galaxy5007
Topic Author
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:46 pm



Quoting Seefivein (Reply 13):
without the new engines - how many times would the C-5 be refueled - both ways to Turkey?

The article is referring to the C-5M fleet; they've been using all three jets for it. 6013 is up @ Eielson now getting the engine change in cold weather test now.

With the TF-39s, they usually stop at Rota or Ramstein and refuel there. They only put enough fuel onboard to get to their next destination. Usually they run 220K out of Dover. I know they could make it to Turkey if they filled the tanks up, but the fear of fuel leaks scares them away from doing so. They have made a flight from Dover to Bagdad with B models several times with 280-300 on board.; That all stopped when we had a line of C-5s waiting to get into fuel cell, and then flight restrictions started up after finding the torque deck panels going bad.

I have to say, I am truely impressed at the climb rate from take off. It almost performs like a C-17 now! They still have the legacy problems to contend with though. Usually when something is broke on it, its a legacy issue. Their MC rate is only around 73% right now, but thats also due to Val/Ver of the new tech data.
 
mossfan15
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:30 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:00 pm

I got to ride one of these from Ramstein to Dover back in September and its truly an amazing aircraft. A recent article I read said the C-5M hass broken 41 airlift records, one of which was from takeoff to FL 400 with full cargo in 24 minutes.
SRA Michael Mays, USAF
 
Galaxy5007
Topic Author
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: Third C-5M Delivered To Dover AFB

Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:11 pm



Quoting Mossfan15 (Reply 15):
I got to ride one of these from Ramstein to Dover back in September and its truly an amazing aircraft. A recent article I read said the C-5M hass broken 41 airlift records, one of which was from takeoff to FL 400 with full cargo in 24 minutes.

Yeah, there is a thread about it I started in here too. I've seen if flying locals at KDOV, and the angles and climb and dive rates they've done with the M is just crazy...it almost acts like a C-17 now

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests