boeing767mech
Topic Author
Posts: 805
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 5:03 pm

C-5 Rewing Question

Sat Jun 09, 2012 5:18 am

So I was reading in the warbird tech book about the C-5A that where rewinged in the 80's that the wing structure that was replace was painted European 1. There are no pictures on the underside of the wing of these airplanes. One of my questions is where the wings on the rewing airplanes still MAC grey or are they also European 1. I read one of the reasons the wing structure was painted in the dark European 1 is because the darker paint absorbed more heat from the sun to help warm the fuel. As given the fact the airplanes was going to be painted European 1 at depot level maintenance.

As one other question. As there any exterior diffenece in the C-5A and the C-5B besides a couple of antenna?? I have a model of a C-5B/M that I got from anigrand that I want to back up to a A model so just wondering about the difference


Thanks
David
Never under-estimate the predictably of stupidty
 
Galaxy5007
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:06 pm

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:18 pm

The first jet, 8214, as well as 8217, both had their new wings installed in regular MAC colors. The rest of the fleet had the Euro 1 wings installed; but the MAC fight control surfaces and extended cover up panels were still in the original colors. They installed them Euro 1 as they were cycling through the jets for the whole paint conversion. It was one less thing that SA-ALC had to paint. So when they went through the paint cycle; the wings were left alone and they just painted the rest of the plane design off of the wing. A buddy of mine said the under wing was also in camo.
It is true, the Euro 1 scheme made the plane VERY hot; but the reasoning behind "warming the fuel" is false; they only painted it prior to installation for convenience. Fuel tanks have and always will be warmed by the hydraulic heat exchangers.

Not really any difference in the A model. The earlier A models didn't have a radome like the B model does; it was all one giant nose plug. I'd link a picture, but the photo search went down...lol. Everything else is antennas, which are the same now except on the legacy A models (ones that haven't been AMP modified).
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:38 pm

It was under Reagan the rewing project was done? Long ago!
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Sun Jun 10, 2012 6:13 am

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 1):
It is true, the Euro 1 scheme made the plane VERY hot; but the reasoning behind "warming the fuel" is false; they only painted it prior to installation for convenience. Fuel tanks have and always will be warmed by the hydraulic heat exchangers

You definately don't want the fuel on the ground warm because it expands when warm and you will not get as much in the tanks!!!

Heating it in the air as it burns off is fine to keep ice from forming but cold fuel on the ground is better. In fact on some of the round the world record trips the fuel was refridgerated before being onloaded on the aircraft. The time Clay Lacy took a 747SP they refridgerated the fuel to cut down on the number of stops they had to make since they where going for a speed record.

I think it held for two weeks then a GIV broke it.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:04 pm

Quoting sweair (Reply 2):
It was under Reagan the rewing project was done? Long ago!

Yes, President Reagan began a despritely needed modernization of the military after the Vietnam War draw down and 4 years of Carter. Reagan also reengined the KC-135s, recommissioned the Iowa class BBs, began the B-1B, C-5B, and M-1 MBT production.

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 1):
The first jet, 8214, as well as 8217, both had their new wings installed in regular MAC colors.

I refueled 8217, the first to operational cargo flight to Europe on her first Volent Boom mission, just off the Newfoundland coast. I believe she launched out of WRI. She was still part of the OT&E program at the time. She looked really strange.
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:42 pm

Just out of interest, how much would it cost to do a new C5 today, a ground up aircraft, not a copy? How long would it take for such a project? Who would be able to do it?
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:33 pm

Quoting sweair (Reply 5):
Just out of interest, how much would it cost to do a new C5 today, a ground up aircraft, not a copy? How long would it take for such a project? Who would be able to do it?
http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=84

Unit Cost: C-5A - $152.8 million (fiscal 1998 constant dollars); C-5B - $179 million (fiscal 1998 constant dollars); Modification unit cost, $90 million (C-5M 2009 constant dollars).

LM would probably be the only company that could do it, and if such a program began today it would take about 4-5 years to produce the first airplane.
 
C46
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:02 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Fri Jun 15, 2012 4:39 am

Hi David – I worked on the C-5 from 87-91. By that time the wing mods were done and I was at Travis, we didn’t have any white birds (the grey-white livery). I do recall they were originally returned to the bases after the wing mod with the Euro 1 paint job on the wing itself minus the slats, flaps, etc. What was also interesting at the time was the A models had a “lighter” Euro 1 paint scheme than the B models. The B models had the dark forest green on them. Other than the VHF antennae, that was the only way we could distinguish them at the time. The B’s had the rectangular shape VHF and the A’s had the “shark tooth” VHF – for lack of better words.

Also, and this is just what I was told at the time, because of the Euro 1 paint job, the warranties on the avionics was voided because it would get so hot in the avionics compartments since it was on the upper left hand side of the aircraft. What we would do on those hot days was actually fire up the APU’s, open both compartment doors and turn the A/C full cold to help cool stuff down.

The thing I hated the most about the Euro 1 paint job was it soaked up the hydraulic leaks – you could never get that fluid cleaned up! Easy to tell where the cargo doors are though!


I always liked the scheme on 8217 – especially because they only painted the radome black and not the entire nose radome plug – made the aircraft look sharp IMO. I still wouldn’t mind getting one of those plugs for a small garden shed though! I also recall that Dover had to keep at least one white bird at the time incase they flew into neutral countries - not sure if that's true or not but at least there was a white bird!

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 6):
LM would probably be the only company that could do it, and if such a program began today it would take about 4-5 years to produce the first airplane.



Or Antonov.

I still think the biggest mistake about the B models was not installing the CF6 engines out of the factory.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: C-5 Rewing Question

Fri Jun 15, 2012 1:22 pm

Quoting C46 (Reply 7):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 6):LM would probably be the only company that could do it, and if such a program began today it would take about 4-5 years to produce the first airplane.


Or Antonov.

I doubt the USAF would do that considering the KC-X program had a dispute about a manufacturer from another country.

Quoting C46 (Reply 7):
I still think the biggest mistake about the B models was not installing the CF6 engines out of the factory.

The C-5M is reengined with the F-138-GE-100 (CF-6-80C2) engines that also power the VC-25A. The GE CF-6-80C engine is essentially the 4th generation of the CF-6 series of engines. But the CF-6-80C was not available in 1985, when the first C-5Bs were produced, they would have come out with either the CF-6-80A, or the CF-6-50C2 of the KC-10A. Both of these engines have smaller diameter fan sections and less thrust.

The original C-5As built on 1969-1974 were equipped with the TF-39-1 or -1A engines, the C-5Bs built in 1985-1989 were equipped with the higher thrust and slightly better reliable TF-39-1C engines.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: angad84 and 8 guests