Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Air Transportation Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Here it comes the C-5M Super Galaxy
Professor Fickle    5/18/2006 2:40:10 PM
>http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=1124ca47-0c9a-494f-8ce1-78032deac235&#d Lockheed reports the C-5M "Super Galaxy", a modernized version of the venerable C-5, features new engines and new avionics. Its GE CF-6 engines -- developed in the commercial sector -- are capable of 22-percent more thrust, resulting in a 30-percent shorter takeoff roll and a 38-percent faster climb to initial altitude. Perhaps even more importantly... the Super Galaxy can carry a LOT more cargo. The C-5 Avionics Modernization Program also adds an all-new pit, featuring a full glass-panel designed for all weather capabilities, and to take some of the workload off the flight crew. -=- what took so lonG?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Librarian    RE:Here it comes the C-5M Super Galaxy   5/18/2006 7:50:18 PM
The same reason that they haven't replace every two engines with one modern turbofan on the B-52 and put newer engines in the A-10s: money follows sexiness. C-5, B-52 and A-10 lack the sexiness of fighters or stealth to attract the proper funding.
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Here it comes the C-5M Super Galaxy   5/20/2006 8:12:07 AM
Why does the A-10 need new engines might I ask?
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas3    AussieEngineer    5/20/2006 9:28:16 AM
Because it lacks the acceleration to seriously reduce MANPAD engagement envelope with the weight it is carrying. What is really needed is a new CAS aircraft build on the A-10 concept. But: Fighters are specified according to what you think the opponent might have - and with no single clear opponent fantasy/caution has a greater leeway. Transports are bulid to fullfil a specific task depending on your internal parameters: supply a btn at distance x .. all figures you know. If you build a new transport you need a changed ambition level. Patrol aircraft are somewhere in between: Fuselage like transport - electronics like a fighter.
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:AussieEngineer    6/28/2006 3:11:18 AM
I see, but it would be replacing them with new high bypass turbofans right.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    RE:more importantly... the Super Galaxy can carry a LOT more cargo.   6/28/2006 3:17:04 AM
Is that like, two M1 tanks vs. one as before?
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:more importantly... the Super Galaxy can carry a LOT more cargo.   6/28/2006 4:35:13 AM
I think they already can carry 2 M1s, C-17s are the ones that can only carry one IIRC.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    RE:more importantly... M1s   6/28/2006 11:09:49 AM
I had understood that, perhaps due to floor loading or some such, C-5 can also carry only one M1 tank.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:AussieEngineer    6/28/2006 3:55:49 PM
I think a clean sheet is better: 1. You have a new engine - that is the purpose of the excersise. 2. You have a radically changed CAS scenario: PGM has radically changed the probability of a hit. 3. You have very different possibilities for air ground cooperation, where the FAC has other possibilities to guide the fighter in: They will today be able to let the CAS plane come in at radically lower altitude: The pilots aquisation of target should be much quicker.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:more importantly... M1s   6/28/2006 3:58:42 PM
Strategic air transport is not a good way to transport armoured formations and reinforcements. The trick about strategic transport is the ability to keep light forces supplied on a much larger scale.
 
Quote    Reply

Griffin    RE:more importantly... M1s   6/28/2006 11:53:58 PM
"Strategic air transport is not a good way to transport armoured formations and reinforcements. The trick about strategic transport is the ability to keep light forces supplied on a much larger scale." That works until armoured forces use 'light forces' as a 'speed bump' to use Storm'n Norman's analogy. While it is ideal if one can move light troops, their equipment and supplies to a landlocked area and not rely on the medium and heavy forces, the reality this is not always going to be the case.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics