Added: 2 years ago
From: theflyingcouch
Views: 5,317
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (11)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Not bad for a bird that first flew back in 1968!

  • @F3HDemonDriver not the same one though. Frequent upgrades have kept it and similar era birds flying today.

  • Helped build some cable harnesses for the C5 AMP program and am now building harnesses for the C-5 M Engine, Pilons, and some stand alone cables. Awesome program.

  • Lockheed could have easily and cheaply produced a stubby C-5 SP version of the C-5 that easily fulfilled the CX requirements and today's M models will give the C-17 a run for it's money indeed---I always thought a buck could have been saved but Boeing fills that niche with it's C-17 program. My youngest son prefers the C-17 to the C-5---I told him he was full of it--The C-5 has better crew comforts and the C-5 flies faster at .77 . The C-5's wing was designed in England for max effeciency.

  • Nice video!

  • I know for fact, that C5M will give the C-17 a run for its money.

  • The New Engines are DeRated by over 25% or Rated Thrust...... what a waste. However it is an improvement over the TF39's. The CF-6's can be almost as loud, at least they were before they were mandated to put reducer cones in the fuel lines. Just like they did to the TF-33's that were in the C-141.

  • Comment removed

  • I can't wait. I'm going to be a Loadmaster for the 709th. I ship out June 15th for BMT

  • Damn what a best!

  • The best thing they ever did was re-engine this beast and i'm glad that they did.

    F138-GE-100 Turbofan Engines (Commercial CF-6-80 Turbofan Engines)

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more