I was a small part of the recovery on this one...........

Quoted: I was a small part of the recovery on this one........... www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/050806-F-0580G-003.JPG

I heard that bird is a strike and is going to be stripped for spare parts.

New info:

01-0196
Boeing C-17A Lot XIII Globemaster III
c/n P-96

0196 (437th AW) ran off runway at Bagram, Afghanistan Aug 6, 2005, collapsing nose and starboard undercarriage.  
Has been w/o.  AFM 1/2006.
Despite reported as w/o, was seen at manufacturer at Long Beach Nov 17, 2005, apparently being repaired.

w/o = written off



01-0196 Arriving in Long Beach for extensive repairs (it was still here at the end of January), this airplane rolled off the runway at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, while landing on Aug. 6 2005, damaging its nose and right main landing gears. As a result, the runway was closed, as when it came to rest, one of the C-17’s wings extended over the active runway. The red painted “nose art” is most likely a prank, as it does not appear on the other side!
From airliners.net

I read somewhere that they might make a c-17 platform into a gunship, might have been wishful thinking but I read it somewhere.

Quoted: I read somewhere that they might make a c-17 platform into a gunship, might have been wishful thinking but I read it somewhere.

It's practically BEGGING to be a gunship!  I've never seen a meaner looking cargo plane!

Quoted: Quoted: I read somewhere that they might make a c-17 platform into a gunship, might have been wishful thinking but I read it somewhere. It's practically BEGGING to be a gunship!  I've never seen a meaner looking cargo plane!

It's also begging to be a tanker....

What's the *better* all-around cargo plane?

C-17 or C-5?

(I know the Galaxy is bigger...but one better than the other?)

Boy I hope the 3rd photo is a takeoff, and not a landing.
Nice pics!

C-17 is generally more reliable and can go into smaller/less prepared fields.

C-5 can carry a larger payload.