Antanov 124

[Neilk]

Originally Posted by FLYGEEZER

Lets give a little attention to the Lockheed Galaxy (C5) made here in this country. The C5 is bigger, faster and has more range & payload than the 124. The C5 cargo compartment is pressurized where the 124 is not. Only the cockpit on the 124 is pressurized. The C5 like the 124 was made for the military but since the colapse of the soviet union, the 124 has been "rented" out to Russian carriers. I have 7500 hour's in the Galaxy & have had more than one tour on the 124. Back in the day...USAF C5's & the 124 would often be parked on the same remote ramp, mostly in the middle east to get these big airplane outta the way. Often we would have the chance to exchange tours with the Russians. Believe me, side by side, the C5 is eons ahead of the 124 in design and function. Now that the Galaxy has been relegated to downsize and some headed to storage as surplus, a lot of intrest is being place on selling them for civilian use for "oversized" air frieght, much like the 124. Lotsa life left in the Galaxy all with probably less than 20,000 hour and 14,000 cycles. Even some foregion carriers are looking to purchase surplus C5's.

Hey Edgar,

Any chance of the C5 being released/sold for civilian use? I thought the US military didn't sell surplus planes, although cargo planes might be different.

Thanks,
Neil

[FLYGEEZER]

Yes Neil; Lotsa cargo & recon aircraft sold to the public. Most of the firefighter craft is X military & sold surplus to mostly part 91 ( I think thats the right #) operators. Lockheed P3 (electra), C130 (L100) comes to mind first. As we speak a California company is in the process of trying to purchase surplus C5A's for outsize cargo & tankers for firefighting. The C5 has an operating of a 375,000lb.& a MTOW of 769,000 lb. Or war emergency 822,000. Thats makes room for a lot of payload/fuel.

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by FLYGEEZER

Yes Neil; Lotsa cargo & recon aircraft sold to the public. Most of the firefighter craft is X military & sold surplus to mostly part 91 ( I think thats the right #) operators. Lockheed P3 (electra), C130 (L100) comes to mind first. As we speak a California company is in the process of trying to purchase surplus C5A's for outsize cargo & tankers for firefighting. The C5 has an operating of a 375,000lb.& a MTOW of 769,000 lb. Or war emergency 822,000. Thats makes room for a lot of payload/fuel.

Just curious, what is operational cost per hour for a C5. It has to just breathtaking.

My credit card would melt with fill up of a C5.

[daepp]

At ONT last month:

[GH85Carrera]

That is a BUNCH of paint!

[FLYGEEZER]

When I retired from the Air Force in 1999, the operational cost was $17,000.00 pr hour ( I think). That was suppoda pay for MX, crew & fuel. I do remember that it burned 120lb/min @ idle. 1800lb/min for two minutes at take off. Flight planning would work out to 30,000 Lb/hr for the first hr. (climb/level off) & about 20,000 lb/hr there after. Normal ramp fuel load from the east coast to say, Frankfort Gr. was about 250.000 lb. It do like kerosene! The 12 fuel tanks total capacity was 322.000 lb. Only saw one pumped full, ever, for a crew to fly it from the sandbox to New York, non stop. It carried NO freight .

[GH85Carrera]

Ok it looks like Jet-A is about 1 grand per ton. So 322,000 lbs is 146 metric tons. So $146,000 for that fill-up in today's dollars. Does that come with green stamps?

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by Laneco

The Antonov (dont' know which one, think it a six engine) flies in and out of Medford a few times a year. We have a company here called Erickson Air Crane that remanufactures Sikorsky helicopters for commercial, often fire-fighting purposes. They fly them in and out on an Antonov.

I try to hang out behind the airport and watch it land when it comes in. It is absolutely phenomenal. This is such a big plane that it looks as if it is a building in the sky compared to mere commercial jets. It sounds different too, nothing like the regular commercial air craft that come here.

The plane is so big that they actually open the nose and tail, then drive a truck through it towing the big helicopters. In one end, out the other.

Absolutely AWESOME air craft.

angela

Hope you get to go inside the bird someday. I have done a tour twice now and the thing is huge. Typical Russian, the pilots do not touch the throttles, they have a "throttleman" like a boat, and call down to others who do the radio work and navigation and so on.

Thing is build like a brick shytehouse and looks the part inside. Simply huge...

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by FLYGEEZER

When I retired from the Air Force in 1999, the operational cost was $17,000.00 pr hour ( I think). That was suppoda pay for MX, crew & fuel. I do remember that it burned 120lb/min @ idle. 1800lb/min for two minutes at take off. Flight planning would work out to 30,000 Lb/hr for the first hr. (climb/level off) & about 20,000 lb/hr there after. Normal ramp fuel load from the east coast to say, Frankfort Gr. was about 250.000 lb. It do like kerosene! The 12 fuel tanks total capacity was 322.000 lb. Only saw one pumped full, ever, for a crew to fly it from the sandbox to New York, non stop. It carried NO freight .

You will see them mostly refueling in Shannon Ireland. The Ruskies have held the fuel contract at the airport there for years now and they get the best deals there, so fill it up as much as possible there, then head to their next stop.

[JJ 911SC]

Originally Posted by FLYGEEZER

Lets give a little attention to the Lockheed Galaxy (C5) made here in this country. The C5 is bigger, faster and has more range & payload than the 124. The C5 cargo compartment is pressurized where the 124 is not. Only the cockpit on the 124 is pressurized. The C5 like the 124 was made for the military but since the colapse of the soviet union, the 124 has been "rented" out to Russian carriers. I have 7500 hour's in the Galaxy & have had more than one tour on the 124. Back in the day...USAF C5's & the 124 would often be parked on the same remote ramp, mostly in the middle east to get these big airplane outta the way. Often we would have the chance to exchange tours with the Russians. Believe me, side by side, the C5 is eons ahead of the 124 in design and function. Now that the Galaxy has been relegated to downsize and some headed to storage as surplus, a lot of intrest is being place on selling them for civilian use for "oversized" air frieght, much like the 124. Lotsa life left in the Galaxy all with probably less than 20,000 hour and 14,000 cycles. Even some foregion carriers are looking to purchase surplus C5's.

Here is your chance for you own thread

C5 on "Mighty Planes" on Discovery HD starting in 1 minutes...

P.S. Too late C5M Super Galaxy

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by JJ 911SC

Here is your chance for you own thread

C5 on "Mighty Planes" on Discovery HD starting in 1 minutes...

P.S. Too late C5M Super Galaxy

Put the puppy on Tivo, it will pick it up whenever it shows next!

[Schrup]

About 20 years ago, I was working on the underground tanks in front of the Norstrom Hangar at Boeing Field. A 124 taxied in & parked at the next hangar. The next day these Russians came over covered in brake dust looking for soap. I had just bought a tub of these new handy citrus wipes. These guys flipped out over the wipes, granted the were new, but they couldn't believe how well they worked. They gave us a full tour of their plane.

This thing was disgusting, it stunk like B.O., cigarettes & vodka. It was filthy, totally unprofessional. I would not have felt comfortable flying with them. In stark contrast was the Nordstrom's Hangar, cleanest & most beautiful hanger I've seen. I would eat off any surface in that building.

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by Schrup

This thing was disgusting, it stunk like B.O., cigarettes & vodka. It was filthy, totally unprofessional. I would not have felt comfortable flying with them. In stark contrast was the Nordstrom's Hanger, cleanest & most beautiful hanger I've seen. I would eat off any surface in that building.

Well, assuming that you have never been to Russia? You have just above described about 85% of the way Russian cities look and smell. I have not been to every one but a lot and except for St. Petersburg, they all were filthy and stunk of vomit, cigs and cheap vodka...

[GH85Carrera]

As a slight divergent:
My dad was an Air Force pilot. When I was a little kid we got to see his "office" a C-124. This was probably 1959. I was very young and it is an early memory. That 124 was often called the pregnant elephant. I was a little kid so everything was big. It had a rope ladder to get to the cockpit. A very different 124

[JJ 911SC]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

Well, assuming that you have never been to Russia? You have just above described about 85% of the way Russian cities look and smell. I have not been to every one but a lot and except for St. Petersburg, they all were filthy and stunk of vomit, cigs and cheap vodka...

and you dont want to buy anything that is made in the second half of any give month

[JJ 911SC]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

As a slight divergent:
My dad was an Air Force pilot. When I was a little kid we got to see his "office" a C-124. This was probably 1959. I was very young and it is an early memory. That 124 was often called the pregnant elephant. I was a little kid so everything was big. It had a rope ladder to get to the cockpit. A very different 124

C-124C Globemaster ll-"Take-Off & Landing"-1958 - YouTube

[beepbeep]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

Typical Russian, the pilots do not touch the throttles, they have a "throttleman" like a boat, and call down to others who do the radio work and navigation and so on.

The engines are not the best. Don't remember if they have FADEC but you cannot just gun the throttles etc. You will often see them riding the brakes at full power for minutes prior to T/O, until "throttleman" is happy with engine status (looking at two dozens of steam gauges).

They never really mastered the art of making a good jet engine.

[Joeaksa]

They really do not have to master anything. They are still, as they always have been, very good at making copies of things.

Right after WW2 the Brits gave them several examples of their front line jet engine. Of course the Russians copied it. Years later others did the same thing and again the Russians copied them.

You are correct that they are not very good at making their own in the engine world but truthfully when the world is selling you the best that they have and they simply make copies, why design your own?

[mikeesik]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

They really do not have to master anything. They are still, as they always have been, very good at making copies of things.



You are correct that they are not very good at making their own in the engine world but truthfully when the world is selling you the best that they have and they simply make copies, why design your own?

Yeah right!!
R-7 Rocket.
Mig -25.
....this is just a miniscule start here.

The U.S was always independent inventing and fabricating tech. Jet Engines, Rocket Engines-Internal Combustion-steam.......

-

[JJ 911SC]

Originally Posted by mikeesik

Yeah right!!
R-7 Rocket.
Mig -25.
....this is just a miniscule start here.

The U.S was always independent inventing and fabricating tech. Jet Engines, Rocket Engines-Internal Combustion.......

-

Yes, American like Von Braun?

Wernher von Braun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia