OT: C-17 Globemaster

[pdmtong]

Absolutely huge - flew right over my house

[Cat3roadracer]

I thought this was going to be a new Colnago.

[bikerboy337]

I spent my summer between junior and senior year of college working as an intern at McDonnell Douglas in Long Beach at the C17 plant. Was a really cool experience and I always love seeing them flying around… thinking I may have been inside it during construction… they are a beast and seeing them do a short takeoff or landing is crazy…

[verticaldoug]

The Airbus A380 is about 30% bigger and can takeoff with 2x the weight of the C-17 Globemaster.

This is a real monster and great fun watching it land at an airport.

[Tz779]

Originally Posted by Cat3roadracer

I thought this was going to be a new Colnago.

lol!

[EB]

McDonnell Douglas really screwed the pooch on that program back in day:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing...lobemaster_III

Funny to think it was supposed to replace the C-130 which is still flying today.

Notably, the management team there are the ones that took over Boeing and made it what it is today.

[KJMUNC]

Yup....now go compare it to the C-5. Absolutely insane aircraft. By comparison, there's more room in the unpressurized tail ramp area than on an entire C-130 Hercules!

The C-17 demo crew performed some pretty good maneuvers at the Miramar air show last year....sounds boring to see a giant cargo plane doing things, but it defies the laws of nature.

[PSC]

I spent 17 years as a C-17 and 9 years as a C-5 loadmaster. One of the best jobs in the military.

[Bostic]

I’m in the flight path for Moffett field. During the pandemic WFH I got used to hearing them land there. Also the C5 and occasional Anton 124. Each has its own unique rumble as they fly over.

I used to live really close to the base and there were a couple weekends where C17’s were doing touch and go’s. Now that was loud.

I’d love to be a passenger on one.

[Jiminyt]

Flown in these and the C-5.

C-17 seems so big and then you walk into the C-5 and it defies believability.

[GregL]

My daughter and I were on top of an Adirondack peak a few years back. My daughter asked me about the large airplane that was flying by - below us. It was a C-17 on a low-level, military VR training route. I estimate the C-17 was doing about 250-300 knots, allowing it to stay within the bounds of the training route and hopefully giving it some protection in the event of a bird strike. Very impressive aviating! Lousy phone photo attached as proof.

Greg

[unterhausen]

The Air Force has a horrible track record of buying transports. The last successful transport was the C130. Which was designed before most of us were born. I worked on one that was just as old as me, and I'm 65.

I got to ride in a C5 on the way to Desert Storm. That was the most comfortable plane I have ever flown in. I imagine the C17 is more like the C141 I flew in on the way back. Okay, maybe not that slow. Talk about design mistakes that never got fixed, the 141 was supposed to be fast, but it was limited because the wing was improperly designed and air would go transonic at cruise. Which is bad.

When Boing lost the C5 contract, they bought a full page ad in the Washington post about how the Air Force had made a huge mistake. They never won another Air Force contract until they bought up all their competitors. OTOH, their competitor to the C5 became the 747, One of the most successful commercial airplanes every. So really the Air Force did them a favor.

[Yossarian]

While the jet airlift aircraft serve well, when it comes to the world of tactical airlift and all around workhorse. The C130 is the king.

[GregL]

Originally Posted by Yossarian

While the jet airlift aircraft serve well, when it comes to the world of tactical airlift and all around workhorse. The C130 is the king.

i had an FO who was in the Air Force Reserve. His unit switched from the C-130 to the C-5. He was very disappointed. He said the C-130 handled incredibly well for a big plane. He also loved the fun, tactical missions. The C-5 did long, boring missions and broke down often.

Greg

[Yossarian]

Originally Posted by GregL

i had an FO who was in the Air Force Reserve. His unit switched from the C-130 to the C-5. He was very disappointed. He said the C-130 handled incredibly well for a big plane. He also loved the fun, tactical missions. The C-5 did long, boring missions and broke down often.

Greg

I recall a flight where the McDonnel Douglas development team observed our 0-dark-30 airdrop missions. All great people to work with and they were interested in how we did our jobs, and what they could do to improve systems on the upcoming C-17.