Recently, the US government has decided to discontinue placing any further orders for the C -17 Globemaster III aircraft. However the competition, C-5 Galaxy aircraft are to be ordered instead. When I heard about this, it really got my attention and I spent some time researching information about both the aircraft. There is a lot of information on various websites, not to mention Wikipedia. I have compiled some very concise information here in this article for your review. And of course, if this get’s your attention as well, you may search the internet for related information yourself.
C-17 is manufactured in the United States by the world famous Boeing company, formerly, McDonnell Douglas. The C-5 is manufactured in United States as well by a well known competition (at least in the defense sector) Lockheed. The plant for C-17 is in California, even though the Boeing company headquarters are in Seattle and the defense segment headquarters are in the state of Missouri. C-17 carries on the name of two previous United States military cargo aircraft, the C-74 Globemaster and the C-124 Globemaster II.
Both the C-17 and the C-5 are used for rapid strategic airlift of troops and cargo to main operating bases or forward operating bases throughout the world. Both have the ability to rapidly deploy a combat unit to a potential battle area and sustain it with on-going battle and cargo supplies. Both the C-17 and C-5 are also capable of performing tactical airlift, medical evacuation and airdrop missions.
The C-17 Globemaster III is relatively a much younger and newer aircraft (almost by 25 years) compared to it’s competitor C-5 Galaxy. The C-17 was introduced on July 14th, 1993 and the C-5 in June of 1070. The respective 1st flights of C-17 Globemaster III and the C-5 Galaxy were on September 15th, 1991 and June 30th, 1968.
Boeing is currently carrying out this advertisement campaign trying to gather signed support from the members of the general public to present to the US Congress so they can re-consider their decision against the C-17 Globemaster III. Hopefully, the armed forces, especially the US air force veterans (VA) and others, will help sign this petition and force the congress to review the case of C-17 again.
By the way, C-17s are currently in service with the US Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, Canadian Forces Air Command, NATO Heavy Airlift Wing, Qatar Air Force, United Arab Emirates, and UK Royal Air Force. C-5 on the other hand, is exclusively and US Air Force aircraft.
I have already signed the petition, as I think it would be the right thing to do. I encourage all of you guys to the same as well. If you have any questions about this, you can post your comments below.
Find more like this: Educational, General Aviation News, Military Pilots, Pilots, Videos , air force, aircraft, boeing, boeing company, c-17 globemaster, c-5 galaxy, combat unit, defense sector, globemaster iii, Lockheed, mcdonnell douglas, medical evacuation, military cargo aircraft, segment, u s air, us government, veterans
3 comments Add your comment »
Get updates when new comments are added. Subscribe to the comments RSS Feed
October 5, 2009
6:30 pm
Neat. You got me thinking now av8er. I did see the C-17 for USA ads around the net. Tough decision if we have to pick one between C-17 and C-5.
January 19, 2010
2:36 pm
This segment is misleading. The choice is not simply between a C-5 or a C-17. It’s about whether to buy more new C-17′s or refurbish and enhance old C-5′s. A new C-17 costs ~$250M. Converting a C-5A/B to a C-5M costs roughly half that. So. . .then the question becomes. . .what are you getting for a C-17 at twice the price? How does about half as much cargo capacity at half the range and at a slower pace sound? Huh, you’re saying? That’s right!! Your yellow comparison chart is out-of-date. That compares a C-17 to a C-5A/B. The C-5M with GE’s CF6 engines puts the C-5 performance through the roof. The other enhancements bring the C-5 avionics into the 21st century and enhance reliability, a major knock against the aging C-5s. The only advantage that a C-17 has is that is can take-off and land on shorter runways.
No matter what aircraft you pick, the work is being done in America, but as an American tax payer and if I needed to get more stuff moved fast, the choice is clearly with the C-5M.
C-5Ms are currently in low rate initial production and the final decision will be a compromised combination of C-17 and C-5Ms. . .as is the way with all politicized government decisions.
May 12, 2010
1:41 am
IDK where the post about the Galaxy's service ceiling was retrieved from, but its too low and wrong…