Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Air Transportation Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: c-5
qwertyuiop    6/5/2005 1:29:41 AM
it seems that it is aging. will it have a replacement or just slowly be phased out with the c-17 filling its roles? it seems that in the future without the abrams something of the c-5 size might not be needed.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
buyer    RE:c-5   9/19/2005 9:00:52 PM
C-5A's are a lot older than C-5B's. Two modernization programs in the works but as a matter of economics, the question is which is the best use of funds, to buy more C-17s or to modernize C-5s. Looks like they will likely modernize the Bs and wait and see how well that goes.
 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith    RE:c-5   9/19/2005 11:51:31 PM
C-5s are running less than 50% availability mostly due to engine issues. Re-engining is supposed to be $11Billion. Replacing 60 C-5 with 120 C-17 is something like $50Billion. But the $11Billion may only get you old airplanes with...what...60, 70% availability, until the next major structural or system problem pops up. The DoD has, in its pursuit of the next golden plated, wizbang technology almost completely destroyed its force structure management. The Air Force is looking at having to replace KC-135, C-5s, C-130s, while trying to take on F-22 and F-35 procurements. The Navy is running out of ships. The Marines are looking at near crisis levels of F/A-18, AV-8, CH-53, the AH-1 and UH-1 remans are disasters. The Army is the only service that is taking a holistic view with FCS and after squandering $Billions over two decades cutting its losses (with a little help from SecDef) by cancelling Crusader and Commanche. The Air Force tanker and transport fleets are being run ragged by current high tempo ops. Re-engining the C-5 will be a stopgap that will not alleviate the big force structure issues over time. They can't just phase them out because they have to have something to carry the freight. If they let the C-17 line shut down, they will incur a whole new set of headaches to either re-open it later or spend $Billions more to develop a new transport that will only be incrementally better than the C-17. If the QDR is worth anything, Air Force tactical air will be severely curtailed to make way for tanker and transport acquisition. They NEED to buy C-17s to replace aging C-5s. Whether they WILL is an open question.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics