Modelcar wrote:.....Walt....The "Flying boxcars" were 2 engined planes with double long extended tails and tied together with rudders and horizonal parts....and indeed they were "119's" and they were around the same time the "Globemasters" I speak of were.....It's possible, but {and certainly I'm not an authority on it}, I never remember "Globemaster" being applied to them. I do remember they were at the Seoul airport in Korea {as we were heading to R&R in Japan}, and we were commenting, hoping it was not going to be one of them to ride on.....They would seemingly run almost the whole length of the runway before lifting off the ground..!
.....Walt....The "Flying boxcars" were 2 engined planes with double long extended tails and tied together with rudders and horizonal parts....and indeed they were "119's" and they were around the same time the "Globemasters" I speak of were.....It's possible, but {and certainly I'm not an authority on it}, I never remember "Globemaster" being applied to them.
I do remember they were at the Seoul airport in Korea {as we were heading to R&R in Japan}, and we were commenting, hoping it was not going to be one of them to ride on.....They would seemingly run almost the whole length of the runway before lifting off the ground..!
I stand/sit corrected on giving that aircraft that designation, I was wrong.
Being Crazy,keeps you from going "INSANE" !! "The light at the end of the tunnel,has been turned off due to budget cuts" NOT AFRAID A Vet., and PROUD OF IT!!
Those C124's defined "drone" when they took off. Sure carried a lot of stuff, though.
Survived my first tour of duty as conductor of record. All the passengers, crew, and equipment made it back to the station in one piece.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Actually, make that three iterations of the Globemaster:
The C-124 used to be nicknamed "Old Shakey"
.....Some years ago we had to travel back and forth from here to Chicago {for my company}, and we used a commuter air line {Lake Central}, here in Muncie to make that trip back and forth for a while...
Along the way they actually were using DC-3's.....and I rode them quite a few times. Sometimes in the winter it would be dark on the way back and riding along I could see the carbon and or sparks of some kind blasting out of the engine exhausts, but didn't seem to bother me very much as I have been around since they {the planes}, were born, and all the talk that followed them and I had the same feelings for those old birds....It dosen't matter, it can fly regarding whatever it's doing. Plenty of rattling and banging too.
Quentin
Hi Cannonball! Where have you been lately? Seems like awhile since I've seen you in here. How are you and Shirl doing? All right, I hope!
I'm a tad bit early for our Saturday Night Pizza Fest, but here is tonight's menu:
1. Anchovie
2. Cheese
3. Pepperoni/mushroom
4. Goetta
5. Hawaiian
6. Supreme
7. Calzones
Hope you all enjoy your pizzas/calzones tonight, and have a great evening. And Tom, glad everything is o.k. your way, as far as the weather is concerned.
Tom , the Douglas ( Dakota c47- R4d - Goony ) or any other bird was and still is a great aircraft and can only be replaced by another of the same. One story comes to mind of a DC2 So shot full of holes by unfriendly guys , it continued to fly sounding like a screaming Mimie. Long live the old bird.
Respectfully, Cannonball
Y6bs evergreen in my mind
Tom
COAST LINE FOREVER
It is better to dwell in the corner of a roof than to share a house with a contentious woman! (Solomon)
A contentious woman is like a constant dripping! (Solomon)
adrianspeeder wrote: tree68 wrote:I think there are B52 jockeys flying airplanes their grandfathers flew. When I was at Griffiss AFB, I was always amazed by the airplane's nose down angle of attack. I've been told that they tried putting four of those big turbofans you see behind AS on a B52 but the thrust was too much.For sure grandson crews on both the B52 and C5. The 8 TF33's are horribly inefficient, and the costs of remotoring with four RB211's were compaired to not be worth it. But wait, they screwed up, (what the air force mess up a budget contract? Nawww...) and it actually would pay off, so it could still happen. Not to much thrust at all and would make the 52 highly capible for another 50 years. Long live the Big Ugly Fat Fu.... Hey lunch is ready. locomutt wrote:The Army has to rely on the Air Force every so often to get their equipment to certain locations! Or every day, lol. "USAF: Coverin' the Army's tail since 1947". Modelcar wrote: ....Adrian: Do you ever get to work around or with a C5A-Glaxy aircraft.....Or possibly ride in one....? I think they are the most awesome aircraft I've seen operate. Edit: Just noticed your C-5 comment....What's the problem with them.....? It is awesome in the fact it can get off the ground. Testament to my maintenance friends on that side of the shop. You want really awesome? Take a plane a bit smaller than the C5, fully freight it, and have it do F-16 type manuvers. The capabilities designed into the 17 are amazing. Tactical takeoffs/landings, 3000ft long / 90ft wide dirt runway ability to rival the C130, electronic flight controls for off the chart relyability, and it does it with over twice the efficiency. An equal comparison is a '08 shortbox crew cab one ton diesel vs a '75 smallblock chevy longbox. Sure the '75 can work, but at cost. I work around C5's when they park next too us, but I swear the gremlins jump off and try to play with us. Not really interested in ridin' one either. Also all the C5As have been retired/scrapped, the remaining C5-Cs are being modified to C5-M with upgraded avionics and hopefully new motors. However it's still a maintenance intensive airframe. Adrianspeeder
tree68 wrote:I think there are B52 jockeys flying airplanes their grandfathers flew. When I was at Griffiss AFB, I was always amazed by the airplane's nose down angle of attack. I've been told that they tried putting four of those big turbofans you see behind AS on a B52 but the thrust was too much.
I think there are B52 jockeys flying airplanes their grandfathers flew. When I was at Griffiss AFB, I was always amazed by the airplane's nose down angle of attack. I've been told that they tried putting four of those big turbofans you see behind AS on a B52 but the thrust was too much.
For sure grandson crews on both the B52 and C5. The 8 TF33's are horribly inefficient, and the costs of remotoring with four RB211's were compaired to not be worth it. But wait, they screwed up, (what the air force mess up a budget contract? Nawww...) and it actually would pay off, so it could still happen. Not to much thrust at all and would make the 52 highly capible for another 50 years. Long live the Big Ugly Fat Fu.... Hey lunch is ready.
locomutt wrote:The Army has to rely on the Air Force every so often to get their equipment to certain locations!
The Army has to rely on the Air Force every so often to get their equipment to certain locations!
Or every day, lol. "USAF: Coverin' the Army's tail since 1947".
Modelcar wrote: ....Adrian: Do you ever get to work around or with a C5A-Glaxy aircraft.....Or possibly ride in one....? I think they are the most awesome aircraft I've seen operate. Edit: Just noticed your C-5 comment....What's the problem with them.....?
....Adrian: Do you ever get to work around or with a C5A-Glaxy aircraft.....Or possibly ride in one....?
I think they are the most awesome aircraft I've seen operate.
Edit: Just noticed your C-5 comment....What's the problem with them.....?
It is awesome in the fact it can get off the ground. Testament to my maintenance friends on that side of the shop.
You want really awesome? Take a plane a bit smaller than the C5, fully freight it, and have it do F-16 type manuvers. The capabilities designed into the 17 are amazing. Tactical takeoffs/landings, 3000ft long / 90ft wide dirt runway ability to rival the C130, electronic flight controls for off the chart relyability, and it does it with over twice the efficiency.
An equal comparison is a '08 shortbox crew cab one ton diesel vs a '75 smallblock chevy longbox. Sure the '75 can work, but at cost.
I work around C5's when they park next too us, but I swear the gremlins jump off and try to play with us. Not really interested in ridin' one either. Also all the C5As have been retired/scrapped, the remaining C5-Cs are being modified to C5-M with upgraded avionics and hopefully new motors. However it's still a maintenance intensive airframe.
YEAH; IT WAS THE U.S. ARMY AIR CORP THEN!!
(well, up until that time.)
Ediit: Q, I belive the original Globemasters were designated C-119s and were called
"Flying Boxcars". I had a cousin (distant) that used to fly them; and he was killed in a mid-air collision years ago while flying one of them.
....Thanks Brian for the update. Globemaster is an "old" icon in airplanes. If I remember correctly while Uncle Sam had me in Korea in the dark ages....Very early 50's, I believe the 4 {prop}, engined Globemasters were ID'd as C124's. Think they had a pretty good reputation in their day. A cavernous interior to haul many, many troops or equipment. Thought I'd get to ride one on my trip to Japan on R&R but not to be....It was a C-47, which {was ok with me}, I knew it could fly even if half a wing was shot off....and one brought me back too....on Thanksgiving Day and they gave us chicken sandwiches at 12,000 cold ft. Hmmm good.
Modelcar wrote:I'm not familiar with what the "17's" are....believe from what your comments are, it's a bit larger and maybe more capable than the "130's" have been....That sounds pretty good.
Quentin, the C-17 replaced the C-141 transport's which have since been retired.
The C-17 is also referred to as the Globemaster....For the Air Force this is I believe the 4th iteration of the Globemaster, whose history dates to the late forties (back when my Dad used to fly them).
Hope this helps.
Brian
(Retired USAF MSgt)
Modelcar wrote: ....Point well taken Willy.One thing though.....When it does hit now, we have catastrophic damage because of the massive build up of property and population since the previous hits early in last century, etc....Andrew and Katrina have devastated such in the past decade or so that one probably has to go back years and years to equal. Not to speak of potential damage to vital oil and refinery infrastructure in the south and Gulf areas.
....Point well taken Willy.
One thing though.....When it does hit now, we have catastrophic damage because of the massive build up of property and population since the previous hits early in last century, etc....
Andrew and Katrina have devastated such in the past decade or so that one probably has to go back years and years to equal. Not to speak of potential damage to vital oil and refinery infrastructure in the south and Gulf areas.
And I agree with those statements 100%. The increase in population along the Gulf Coast has had a major impact on the amount of damage we see from tropical cyclones that, in previous years, might not have caused nearly as much destruction.
EDIT: I agree also about the TV ratings. If Fox News puts their guy out in 130 mph winds, the other guy will have to put their reporter in 140 mph winds, just to outdo the competition. I also noted that as Gustav approached, some national news stations were reporting that it was a category 5 hurricane when it was actually a category 4 at the time. They could have just been misinformed, but my guess is that they were actually trying to get more viewers and higher ratings. Unfortunately, it can put the public in a lot of danger to report in a certain way, simply for the sake of getting a better rating.
Willy
Edit: One more thing Willy.....TV reporting....130 mph....ratings...!
....Adrian:
I'm not familiar with what the "17's" are....believe from what your comments are, it's a bit larger and maybe more capable than the "130's" have been....That sounds pretty good.
My only experience of watching a C5 perform {up close}, has been at the Ft. Wayne {In}, airport some years ago. Watched it taxi to the take off position on the runway and turn around and go full throttle and I couldn't believe my eyes the size if it rolling down the runway and lifting off in such a short run, in a surprisingly steep angle before it got to where the runways cross....half way....and then make a wide sweeping turn and fly right back down the same runway {with flaps hanging down}, it just lifted off from, but just several hundred ft. high.....What a sight....!! And sound.
Tom and Quentin,
This table from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration lists the 65 major (Category 3 or higher) hurricanes that have made landfall in the United States from 1900 to 1999. It is interesting to note that 35 of those 65 major hurricanes hit the United States before 1950. Thus, there has not been an increase in the number of major hurricane hits to the United States in recent years.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/deadly/Table4.htm
The table is a link off of this very informative page:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/deadly/index.html
Plus, in both 2006 and 2007, not a single major hurricane struck the United States. The United States has not been hit by a major hurricane this year either (although we have been hit by numerous weaker tropical storms and hurricanes). Thus, it really can't be said that we've seen an increase in major hurricane strikes since Katrina either.
The reason that it seems that major hurricanes were rare through the mid 1900s and even into the late 1900s is simple: the media was not nearly as dramatic as it is now. Back then, you didn't have 100 reporters standing out in the 130 mph winds and screaming at the top of their lungs that the sky is falling. Now, it seems that even a tropical storm with 40 mph winds brings out that behavior.
Just keeping it real here.
USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman
....I was wondering about you and your area Tom, but you sound like it was just a heavy weather system with massive rain.....Now, as you say the other one....and again, headed into the Gulf.
What's up with such a pattern....? We didn't seem to hear of such repeatable action before a few years ago with Katrina. Wonder what's different now...? Too many oil rigs in the Gulf....
I note with all the demand for oil being reduced and comparing the 4 dollar plus / gal. of gasoline and what crude was, and how much it has come down...we should be seeing roughly an 80 cent reduction in gasoline prices. Not so around here. Some, but not near that much. Funny, it slips up so fast, but can't seem to fall back that easy.
Bright and light clouds and blue sky and sunshine this morning...62 degrees in the last half hour. Wondering whether to open up the windows....Probably can.
Good weekend to all....
Oh yes Tom....Those leaks around chimneys....They always seem to be a bit difficult to overcome. Never had such problem...No chimney....all electric. Guess that's one way to cure it.
Good morning, it's Saturday! Having survived Hanna, it is described by one local TV station as a non-event. Very little wind, but a lot of rain tho. We had a leak around the chimney that dripped badly and annoyed the wife no end. The roofer said he would be here later to track down the problem. On a related note, the track for Ike shows it headed for New Orleans. That place seems to attract those things like a magnet.
Everybody take care
Good Saturday morning to Joe and all the rest of you! It's a very pleasant morning, with around 66, 67 degrees, and our high today is only supposed to get to about 79, maybe 80 by 5, 6 p.m.
I'm hearing on our local news that Hana has made landfall in the Carolinas. I hope all our forum friends, and all the others along the coast are all right this morning. Let's all keep them in our thoughts today.
Joe, thanks so much for getting breakfast this morning. Sausage, eggs & toast sound pretty good this morning. You all have a great time in Deshler, and keep safe, now, all right?
Wishing you all a safe Saturday, and everyone take care, please.
good morning
juice coffee and lemonade are ready to go.We have eggs toast and sausage coming up.going to deshler today.we have a canadian foamer staying this week.will be back late for pizza.
stay safe
joe
Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").
cherokee woman wrote:Friday Fish Fry Menu:1. Cod2. Perch3. Bass4. Catfish5. Rolled oysters6. Butterfly shrimp Side dishes:1. corn on the cob; 2. baked beans; 3. fries; 4. hushpuppies; 5. cole slawDesserts:The following pies: 1. chocolate; 2. apple; 3. peach; 4. pecan
Friday Fish Fry Menu:
1. Cod
2. Perch
3. Bass
4. Catfish
5. Rolled oysters
6. Butterfly shrimp
Side dishes:
1. corn on the cob; 2. baked beans; 3. fries; 4. hushpuppies; 5. cole slaw
Desserts:
The following pies: 1. chocolate; 2. apple; 3. peach; 4. pecan
The warmer bar has been refreshed for tonight's round of our Friday Fish Fry.
Hope you all enjoy your supper, and I also hope you all have a good evening.
I've seen the C-5s up close; C-17s are new to me; I've flown on C-130s and C-141Bs.
Mookie wrote:So is that his main job with Navy - as firefighter?
That is his job with the Navy. 24 on, 24 off, with the occasional extra day off thrown in.
The C5 dates back to the 70's and my tenure in USAF, so it's possible that there could be some father/son matchups there.
Don't dis the C5 too much - it's still one of the biggest airplanes flying. Had one at our airshow here this summer. You can drive a tank right straight through.
Tinker AFB in Oklahoma City was (and probably is still) the repair depot for B52's and KC135's. They'd move them in one of of the mile-long building, and they'd come out the other end all fixed up....
Mookie wrote:Adrian: Big aren't they! Used to watch the B52's do touch and go's at Oklahoma AFB in the 60's - something that big doing t & g. I was so impressed!
Humm, they are very big; you should see one of them go underneath your helicopter.
There are/were several low level flight routes here in Ky. for the B-52s; we'd be at
about 1000 feet and one of them would fly underneath.
(I won't make any comments to their "nickname"; BUFF)
It's the slightly smaller C17 compared to the larger, but mostly junk, C5. At idle ya are good to walk up right to the engine. Full power or even worse, thrust reversers for backing up, will suck a golf ball through a garden hose.
Adrianspeeder
adrianspeeder wrote:Why I like my job. On days when there ain't guidance and control issues occupying my time and I get to play crew chief on a launch. I find it satisfying standin' by on the startup of four 42000lbs of thrust per motor Pratt and Whitney F117 goodness. Plus it makes a cool photo...Adrianspeeder
Why I like my job.
On days when there ain't guidance and control issues occupying my time and I get to play crew chief on a launch. I find it satisfying standin' by on the startup of four 42000lbs of thrust per motor Pratt and Whitney F117 goodness. Plus it makes a cool photo...Adrianspeeder
Adrian, nice picture!
Is that a C-5 or a C-17?
And don't get too close to the intakes of those engines!
(and don't even think about using one of them in one of your trucks!)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.