Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Erik

First Production C-5M Super Galaxy Takes Flight

Recommended Posts

C-5M-1st-production-1st-flight.jpg

 

First Production C-5M Super Galaxy Takes Flight

 

Lockheed Martin

 

MARIETTA, Ga., September 21st, 2010 -- Lockheed Martin’s [NYSE: LMT] first production C-5M Super Galaxy made its first flight here Sept. 19 sporting the new “Super Galaxy” tail flash and nose art. It is set to be delivered Sept. 30 and will arrive for duty at Dover Air Force Base, Del., in November.

 

 

Lockheed Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So cool to see this monster having a new youth ! Just hope that there will be still 'Galaxy' during several years :drinks:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew up with C-5A's flying overhead in MAC colors: white over gray with a blue stripe and silver wings. I still prefer to see them painted that way. The gray scheme shown above looks much better than Euro One though. It is amazing to see one coming in for a landing. The combination of large size and low speed makes it look like they are just hanging in the air. While roughly the same size as a 747, its rarity and military purpose has always made the C-5 special to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These "M" models have a slightly better maintenance rate than the C-5's I have at my wing. They have better engines and better wings, but they used more money to fund those than to get new C-17's. Got to love a senator who wants his state to have jobs. We are flying C-5A's and have the oldest in the fleet. Some of ours were even in Operation Baby Lift. They are still C-5's and broke very often. Case in point, we are getting C-17's instead of the C-5M. Another Lockheed press op......I wish I could give you all more details...you would laugh.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see that this big birds will have a future.

I very often can see the ukrainian couterpart, the AN-124, in the air, sometimes the A-380 and in one or two cases the AN-225.

I love this really big birds!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The state of Georgia has always had a special realtionship with arms deals via its leadership of the Senate Arms Committee. Lockheed Georgia won many contracts whether or not they were the best option thanks to their connections. My submarine was named after Georgia Senator Richard B. Russell thanks to his "kindness" to the Navy and the military in general. It is funny when they single out someone like Duke Cunningham and put him in jail when almost the entire system is corrupt. Of course, Duke isn't laughing about it. Duke must have crossed someone higher up to end up being investigated and prosecuted.

 

From what I understand, the Boeing design was superior in many ways, but Lockheed made a much lower bid and then needed bailout money from the federal government to survive cost overruns caused by design problems and delays. Boeing took the lessons learned from the design competition and turned it into the 747. While the C-5A's wings were cracking, the 747 became a huge commercial success. I love the C-5A, but it is a terrible design compared to the 747.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you can't really compare the two (747 and C-5A) either.

 

The aircraft were designed to operate in completely different environments. One only has to look at the wings to notice that.

 

The main thing most military cargo aircraft need is roll on/roll off capability without the need of dedicated ground equipment. This drives the design to a high wing. Look at all the super heavy lifters out there with roll on/roll off...yep, high wing. That also means the nose and tail of the aircraft must have cargo openings that span the full fuselage width to take full advantage of that roll on/roll off capability. A 747F does not have such a capability, and other than one-off designs (the 747 LCF), no such thing exists for the 747.

 

In the book "747" (http://www.amazon.com/747-Creating-Worlds-Adventures-Aviation/dp/0060882417), Joe Sutter states specifically that the 747 was designed as a freighter and PAX aircraft from the start (page 90), and is very clear that this design was NOT the competitor for the C-5.

 

Boeing's C-5 competitor looked a lot like the An-124. Which means it could have very well suffered from the same stresses that the wings and wing box of the C-5 suffered in part due to the high wing design. Because the Boeing aircraft was never more than a paper design, we will never truly know.

 

FC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..