User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:11:27 AM EDT
[#1]
crap. that's a big plane to go down.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:12:39 AM EDT
[#2]
Nothing on Fox News.com
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:16:04 AM EDT
[#3]
It came out as a news alert on FNC. Only thing they are saying is multiple injuries.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:18:33 AM EDT
[#4]
That firetruck looks small compared to the nose of the C5
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:18:40 AM EDT
[#5]
Fuck that will make one hell of a lawn dart.
Tag for updates. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:18:50 AM EDT
[#6]
*injuries* are allways a good thing in a large plane crash... Because injuries <> fatalities... Hurt beats dead anyday... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:19:54 AM EDT
[#7]
Everything looks small next to a C5 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:20:55 AM EDT
[#8]
HOLY SHIT YOU SEE THIS VIDEO OF THE PLANE ON CNN?
The nose end straight up cracked off. prayers out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:22:17 AM EDT
[#9]
It was only a matter of time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:22:45 AM EDT
[#10]
thank god no fatalities. that musta been a HARD landing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:31:44 AM EDT
[#11]
looks about 200 yards short of runway.
greg kelly bring sup the 'no fire' fact. very lucky since word is it had just taken off and was returning due to problems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:33:37 AM EDT
[#12]
A little Lots of TLC, rivets, glue, duct tape, and paint. She will fly again..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:33:48 AM EDT
[#13]
where is the tail.
www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/03/c5.crash.ap.ap/index.html Giant C-5 military jet crashes in Delaware DOVER, Delaware (AP) -- A C-5 cargo plane carrying 17 people crashed near Dover Air Force Base early Monday, state officials said. There was no immediate word on fatalities. The plane, the military's largest, went down about 6:45 a.m., said Allen Metheny, assistant director in the state Department of Public Safety. He said some people were taken to hospitals with injuries, but he did not have numbers or details of the extent of the injuries. The plane broke into three pieces, with the cockpit separated from the fuselage and a wing shattered. It wasn't immediately clear whether the plane was taking off or landing when it crashed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:36:57 AM EDT
[#14]
Is that confirmed? It did look pretty survivable. In the crash photo, you can see the slides are down, so obviously a number of people were able to walk away. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:39:01 AM EDT
[#15]
Video Fox had showed the tail 1/4 to 1/2 mile away from the plane.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:39:32 AM EDT
[#16]
The flight deck appears intact in the picture, but the break split open the passenger compartment.
No real sign of fire. The left wingtip looks like they foamed it, but that might have been precautionary with fuel leaking. There is a black streak across the wing from the No. 1 engine pylon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:53:07 AM EDT
[#17]
my swag is that it was a 'low speed' crash. lots of stuff still intact.
I'd like to say thats the first C5 to crash, the only others that went down were due to unfriendly fire, IIRC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 4:56:08 AM EDT
[#18]
  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:00:33 AM EDT
[#19]
HOLY SHIT that's a big ass plane. The fire truck looks like a freakin' toy compared to it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:04:27 AM EDT
[#20]
See what happens when someone goes #2 in the on-board portapotty?
 Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:07:25 AM EDT
[#21]
Forward of the wing (on the remaining fuselage area) is crew rest area isn't it? I see the slide's down there, so I presume somebody was in that area.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:17:11 AM EDT
[#22]
Actually looks like it broke right through the forward crew/passenger area... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:20:07 AM EDT
[#23]
The break in the forward section occured just forward of the crew rest area. A C5 carries up to 13 crewmembers on an augmented crew, only 3 are actively involved in flying at any one time and 2-3 are loadmasters in the "troop" or passenger comapartment which is behind the wing in the back of the jet.
If you look at the wreck the slides are clearly visible coming down from the troop and the vey back of the crew rest area. That's good, means people got out. The troop compartment and crew rest area are not connected, the center wing box and flight control cables/hydraulics are in the middle over the wing. I'm not sure, believe I heard a few minutes ago that they were outbound fom Dover, declared an IFE (in flight emergency) and turned back. What bugs me is that the tail is so far away from the rest without a debris trail connecting the two. I saw video shot by friends in Germany (1991?)when the one went down coming out of Ramstein and the scene was way spread out, but was connected by debris and burned trees. The plane carries 13 crew, up to 75 passengers in the troop. There is an airbus config where the cargo box can be filled with airline seats, but it's used rarely if at all. You can see some pallets laying in the break between section, there is room for 36 pallets, 9'x9' each. I crew chiefed C5's for 2.5 years out of Travis in California. It's a big, complicated jet requiring a lotta maintenance. My prayers go out for the safety of the crew and passengers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:23:23 AM EDT
[#24]
Thanks, it's been a while since I crawled around a Fred. It made me appreciate my "little" KC-135. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:23:47 AM EDT
[#25]
When I was stationed at Ramstein Air Base in Germany back in the mid-80's, we use to watch those big pigs take off headed back to the states with lots of gas and cargo. Was very interesting (and down right scary) on how much runway they would use getting off the ground. I can't count how many times they were hauling that big whale in the air with virtually no runway left. I shit you not..........it almost looked like they would snag the wires at the end of the runway.
 vmax84 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:25:04 AM EDT
[#26]
They're gonna feel that in the morning.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:25:07 AM EDT
[#27]
... that thing is remarkably intact
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:25:20 AM EDT
[#28]
With no new cargo air craft in that lift class in production and the C-17 purchase slashed to bellow a critical level, thus starts the death of US air lift capacity by attrition...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:30:43 AM EDT
[#30]
From what I have seen in the footage is that they were trying to make it to the runway. The gear was down. It must have been in a very nose high attitude trying to make it the last couple hundred yards. The tail section hit first and broke off, while the rest of the plane continued (skid marks just under the right wing). It looks like the left gear failed and stubbed the wingtip causing a sudden whiplash that snapped the nose section off.
Probably lucky they stopped where they did because there is a wooded area just ahead, most likely would have caused a fire from fuel tanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:30:54 AM EDT
[#31]
the news said 17 on board. which apparently is more than usual ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:32:23 AM EDT
[#32]
Well, it's more than their usual, unaugmented, aircrew of seven. But far less than than their limit. C-5 Fact Sheet Edit to fix crew number and add link. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:35:37 AM EDT
[#33]
Man, they were $%^&* lucky!! That could have been so much worse. That's just a whole lot of airplane to hang onto when things aren't going your way. Hats off to the crew.
 vmax84 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:36:51 AM EDT
[#34]
Now the entire aircrew is going to have one more takeoff than landing in thier logs. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:42:10 AM EDT
[#35]
Whoops! It's been 20 years since I was upstairs on one of those boogers. The pax compartment is behind the wing, not in front.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:44:37 AM EDT
[#36]
smilingbandit, thanks for the link! I saved that one.
The number 17 can be any combination of crew and passengers. I 've been on missions where the crew put 2 passengers in the back with the loadmasters rotating through back their one at a time when we had room up front. I 've also had the troop full and more pax up front- depends on the crew, most want the rest area for their use. It gets tight when you start adding people up front, plus there's only so many ways out- you don't want a long line for the slides. You don't see any ropes hanging out the pilots windows- thery have them, but nobody wants to use them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:49:48 AM EDT
[#37]
Nope. Operation a C5 went down in Operation Babylift in 1975 and one crashed at Ramstein in Gulf War I. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 5:53:49 AM EDT
[#38]
You don't see the left side of the cockpit section, but they may well have used the standard entry ladder. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 6:13:17 AM EDT
[#39]
Looks like another case of "Bush's Fault".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 6:18:27 AM EDT
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 6:23:26 AM EDT
[#41]
I thought this thread was about CaptainPooby's vette. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:00:01 AM EDT
[#42]
Can someone elaborate on the tail section missing?
If it is 1/4 mile away, does that sound like it broke off? (even a s/a missile, however unlikely that may be?) I can't imagine it is flyable without the rear stabilizer. What is the likely scenario... once it came off, the plane went down right away, and it just happened to be close to the ground and the crash wasn't too severe? I have read how the B52's fly nose down. Does the C5 do anything similar? Could it fly without a tail for a mile or so? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:06:42 AM EDT
[#43]
A SAM would go for the engines, not the tailcone. A likely senario is that when trying to make the runway after their IFE they we're able to maintain airspeed, in order to try to keep altitude the aircraft was placed in a more nose-up attitude, when the jet could no longer keep flying the back end hit the ground first and the tail fractured (I have a cool video of an MD-80's tail doing the same thing from a test flight). As this point the aircraft (sans tail) could contine to fly in ground effect for a short time until coming to a rest. BUFFs are the only plane I can think of that fly at that unusual attitude in level flight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:08:57 AM EDT
[#44]
Yeah, it does seem like a hundred years ago. I loved being at Ramstein (read in, I loved being based in Germany). Fun base to be at............lots of transport activity, and at the time I was there, a fun F-4 base. They were just bringing in the F-16's when I was leaving. Now, I guess the fighters are all gone. I guess time has a way of marching on.  But yeah, those dang things would just eat the runway up at times. I do remember one particular instance where we were talking to the crew chief of a C-5 and he said "watch this takeoff........we are gonna use a lot of runway". They had put a bunch of fuel on and lots of cargo. We climbed to the top of the big fuel tanks near the runway (I worked in the lab for the fuels department, so we had a lot of access on the base) and watched him come lumbering down the runway. We were all crappin' our pants.......it just didn't look like he was gonna get in the air. At the last minute, the nose of the plane came up and that big whale just waddled into the air, barely clearing the arresting wires at the end of the runway. I will never forget that. Anyway, sorry to hijack the thread. Kinda fun to step back in time for a minute.  vmax84 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:10:21 AM EDT
[#45]
thanks. that makes a lot of sense. if it was only a 1/4 mile away, as a reporter stated, that is only 1200 feet.
I guess that isn't very far at 200 mph for a 250 ft long aircraft. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:15:36 AM EDT
[#46]
I don't know how logs are kept, but--they landed.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:27:50 AM EDT
[#47]
Question for Loadmasters.
Would this be consistent with a load shift? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 7:38:11 AM EDT
[#48]
An amazing aircraft,the C-5. When the C-5 first came out,the AF took it over to Cincinnati-Lunken(6000 ft runway,the TFs were manufactured at GE-Evandale,AF just had to show it off),with no problems. Show up at Lunken with a B-727-200,you'll get a nastygram from Lunken mgnt,due to the fact that the runways/taxiways can't handle the high wheel loadings.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 8:05:06 AM EDT
[#49]
The pallets are 108" by 88' and up to 90' tall, maxing out at 10,000 lbs. The break in the tail section looks well behind the passenger compartment. The passenger compartment only goes a little ways towards the tail after the door with the slide open is. The crew section definitely got trashed, I'd guess it cracked around the lavatory and galley area, What strikes me as odd is that the rear ramp doors are opened, hydraulic problems are not an odd thing with these beasts, and maintinence is a constant battle. I am curious as to how many pallets were loaded and how well they stayed in place, I see a couple on the ground but that would be from the deck tearing out under them. Its odd how the nose is right next to the rest of the craft. possible that the tail broke, the crew tried to make an emergency landing and the nose hit... hard... first. Whatcha think snuffy, im an Air trans guy with the Port at travis. Hopefully nobody died, we are loosing to many people over here in the kitty box as it is. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2006 8:05:41 AM EDT
[#50]
that sucks, but glad to hear all the guys made it
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
