Why is an AN-24 hauling a US helicopter?
04-26-2013, 12:26 PM
#33
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Position: PC-12/U-28 Evaluator Pilot, B747-400/-8 CA
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
With the visor up, the entry on the C-5 is ceiling to floor, wall o wall--about a 17' square with a drive in ramp. Fold the blades and H-53s went in.
GF
GF
04-29-2013, 06:17 PM
#34
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by LabDad
Why is an AN-24 hauling a US helicopter when US cargo pilots are furloughed?
Pilot to Co-Pilot: “Haven’t We Been Here Before?” “Da…” | TIME.com
"Soldiers from 2nd Squadron, 17th Cavalry Regiment ensure safe conduct while loading an OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter onto a Russian Antonov AN-124 cargo plane at Bagram Airfield, Feb. 8."
For you furloughed guys, I'm dissapointed to see this and hope you all are back to work soon.
Pilot to Co-Pilot: “Haven’t We Been Here Before?” “Da…” | TIME.com
"Soldiers from 2nd Squadron, 17th Cavalry Regiment ensure safe conduct while loading an OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter onto a Russian Antonov AN-124 cargo plane at Bagram Airfield, Feb. 8."
For you furloughed guys, I'm dissapointed to see this and hope you all are back to work soon.
There is a person I know of who has been unsuccessfully trying to get a trio of mothballed C5 and/or new C17 aircraft to begin operating the austere and oversize market.
His Facebook profile is here https://www.facebook.com/helpbyair?ref=ts&fref=ts
Like his page and you will automatically be subscribed to his updates.
05-01-2013, 01:13 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,483
Originally Posted by strong current
I agree with you 100% there is no reason acceptable enough to be giving away hundreds of millions, possibly over a billion dollars a year to the Russians and Ukranians. I know what the reasons are, and like I said they are not acceptable to me.
There is a person I know of who has been unsuccessfully trying to get a trio of mothballed C5 and/or new C17 aircraft to begin operating the austere and oversize market.
His Facebook profile is here https://www.facebook.com/helpbyair?ref=ts&fref=ts
Like his page and you will automatically be subscribed to his updates.
There is a person I know of who has been unsuccessfully trying to get a trio of mothballed C5 and/or new C17 aircraft to begin operating the austere and oversize market.
His Facebook profile is here https://www.facebook.com/helpbyair?ref=ts&fref=ts
Like his page and you will automatically be subscribed to his updates.
05-01-2013, 03:03 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Sr. VP of button pushing
Posts: 2,730
Lockheed certified the C-141, there are still some folks running around with L-300 types. Douglas floated the idea of a civil C-17 but no one bit. Can't find a type data sheet under Douglas or Boeing so I'm guessing they were never certified.
05-01-2013, 03:31 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
I remember reading an Aviation Week article (around 1998?) discussing how McDonnell Douglas was giving FedEx the hard sell on a civilian version of the C-17. It would have reduced the military price/aircraft. DOD even offered to enhance the deal with guaranteed military charters ... FedEx didn't bite
05-01-2013, 05:34 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,408
World had told the military at one time that we would take all ten. It was an extremely convoluted deal. It surprised nobody when it fell through. The final nail in the coffin for the BC-17 was when the military ordered more and foreign orders came in the kep the production line open.
05-01-2013, 06:51 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,982
Originally Posted by strong current
I agree with you 100% there is no reason acceptable enough to be giving away hundreds of millions, possibly over a billion dollars a year to the Russians and Ukranians.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
