C-17 Globemaster III

[Amsel]

This particular aircraft is fascinating to me. Is anyone else a fan of it?

"The C-17 measures approximately 174 feet (53 meters) long with a wingspan of 169 feet, 10 inches (51.76 meters). The aircraft is powered by four fully reversible Pratt Whitney F117-PW-100 engines (the commercial version is currently used on the Boeing 757). Each engine is rated at 40,440 pounds of thrust. The thrust reversers direct the flow of air upward and forward to avoid ingestion of dust and debris. Maximum use has been made of off-the-shelf and commercial equipment, including Air Force-standardized avionics.

The aircraft is operated by a crew of three (pilot, copilot and loadmaster), reducing manpower requirement risk exposure, and long-term operating costs. Cargo is loaded onto the C-17 through a large aft door that accommodates military vehicles and palletized cargo. The C-17 can carry virtually all of the Army's air-transportable equipment.

Maximum payload capacity of the C-17 is 170,900 pounds (77,519 kilograms), and its maximum gross takeoff weight is 585,000 pounds (265,352 kilograms). With a payload of 160,000 pounds (72,575 kilograms) and an initial cruise altitude of 28,000 feet (8,534 meters), the C-17 has an unrefueled range of approximately 2,400 nautical miles. Its cruise speed is approximately 450 knots (.74 Mach). The C-17 is designed to airdrop both equipment and 102 paratroopers".

 

[evangilder]

Oh hell YEAH! I have seen several demos of the C-17 over the last few years and it never fails to impress me with it's nimbleness despite it's size. It's been extremely reliable. I think the C-17 will go down in history as being one of the greats with the C-130 and C-47.

 

[Amsel]

It is amazing to see that big bird land. With its reverse thrust engines it can land almost anywhere. Very nimble for its size.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Great aircraft. Got to fly on one onetime. It really is an amazing aircraft in my opinion, when it comes to capabilities.

 

[HoHun]

Hi Amsel,

>Is anyone else a fan of it?

It's not pretty, but the way it flies is just amazing ...

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I think for a cargo aircraft, she is pretty damn good looking.

I like that pic with the Ju 52 and the C-117. Was that taken at the ILA in Berlin?

 

[CharlesBronson]

Is this picture real or photoshopped ?

If true is a really amazing climb

 

[Crunch]

Looks real to me!

I first saw one of these at Avalon Airshow in about 96, before I had even heard of them! Very impressive aircraft. And as DerAdlerIstGelandet said, for a bus, it looks damn fine!

 

[Wildcat]

It certainly is an impressive aircraft. Here are some pics I snapped of an RAAF version.

 

[comiso90]

Made in my hometown of long beach,ca.... you cant imaging the agility until u see it in flight.

 

[evangilder]

Is this picture real or photoshopped ?

If true is a really amazing climb

I was there watching it through my viewfinder. It was not photoshopped. That is how it came out of the camera, and how the C-17 came out of the dust. Very, very impressive aircraft.

 

[Airframes]

Thought they must be your pics Eric! Great as usual!
Those from Wildcat are the first to give me an impression of its sheer size - b****y massive! Only ever seen one once, at a distance, going into Brize Norton, looked big then, but nothing to scale it against. Now I know!
Thanks for all the pics guys.
Terry.

 

[Flyboy2]

Love that one... A few days ago there were three C-17's flying in a close line formation low over my school. Made one heck of a racket. Kinda felt stupid thought because I was the only one looking up at it....

 

[davparlr]

Unless they upgraded to flat panels, the C-17 uses the same 6x6 inch color CRTs I was responsible for developing for the B-2. One of the guys who worked for me left and went to work on the C-17 control and display avionics. There is an interesting story about those CRTs. Due to national security, all B-2 components were required to be manufactured in the U.S. (this later changed to allow equipment that could possibly be built here if sources were cut off), so, my team went searching for domestic high resolution color CRTs. Well, at first we could find no manufactures that built CRTs in the U.S., not Magnavox, not RCA, not Motorola, no one. Finally we did find one manufacturer, Techtronix, an electronic test equipment manufacturer. Not only were they the only manufacturer in the U.S., but, to our happy surprise, they also happened to build the brightess, highest resolution display in the world, almost fifty percent higher than the resolution of the best high resolution computer monitor at the time. Getting this strickly commercial supplier to sell to the government and accept all the associated red tape is another story, including the pressuring and pleading by some very high government officials, and a lot of money. They later sold the manufacturing rights to another company, probably to get away from that red tape.

As for the C-17, it is a young upstart with great talent that, in my mind and heart, has a lot of wars to go through and worldwide emergencies to support before it can match the greatness of the plane it replaced, the C-141.

 

[Trebor]

I think I'll build a model of this beautiful bird, if there is one

 

[Crunch]

I think I'll build a model of this beautiful bird, if there is one

in 1:24 scale?

 

[evangilder]

Unless they upgraded to flat panels, the C-17 uses the same 6x6 inch color CRTs I was responsible for developing for the B-2. One of the guys who worked for me left and went to work on the C-17 control and display avionics. There is an interesting story about those CRTs. Due to national security, all B-2 components were required to be manufactured in the U.S. (this later changed to allow equipment that could possibly be built here if sources were cut off), so, my team went searching for domestic high resolution color CRTs. Well, at first we could find no manufactures that built CRTs in the U.S., not Magnavox, not RCA, not Motorola, no one. Finally we did find one manufacturer, Techtronix, an electronic test equipment manufacturer. Not only were they the only manufacturer in the U.S., but, to our happy surprise, they also happened to build the brightess, highest resolution display in the world, almost fifty percent higher than the resolution of the best high resolution computer monitor at the time. Getting this strickly commercial supplier to sell to the government and accept all the associated red tape is another story, including the pressuring and pleading by some very high government officials, and a lot of money. They later sold the manufacturing rights to another company, probably to get away from that red tape.

As for the C-17, it is a young upstart with great talent that, in my mind and heart, has a lot of wars to go through and worldwide emergencies to support before it can match the greatness of the plane it replaced, the C-141.

I'm not familiar with the differences in the glass panels, but here is the C-17 that was at the 2007 Riverside show.

I think the C-17 will go down as one of the greats. The amount of hours it has flown so far are impressive (over a million hours of operational missions). In 2006, it set the record for the heaviest load dropped out of any aircraft, with a 65,000 lbs. simulated AirLaunch QuickReachTM rocket. It has been performing at 84.7 percent mission-capable rate when tasked for missions, which is pretty impressive.

 

[davparlr]

I'm not familiar with the differences in the glass panels, but here is the C-17 that was at the 2007 Riverside show.

I cannot tell if they are CRTs, although they look like they are. Here is the displays in the B-2. This is a simulator picture.

I think the C-17 will go down as one of the greats.

I have no doubt it will.

 

[Trebor]

in 1:24 scale?

LOL no

I did just find one by Revell Germany in 1/144 scale.

how big is that?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Will someone ask Ho Hun if that picture he posted with the Ju 52 and the C-17 is from the ILA in Berlin. I think he still has me on ignore...

I really like that pic.