C17 lands on a/c carrier

[Retired W4]

Active duty AF retired theirs in 2004, AFRES retired theirs in 2006. C-17's went operational in 1995 and eventually replaced the C-141B.

The Starlifter was a great aircraft, I have just over 400 hours in them as a Flight Nurse, I served from 1987-1995. Our squadron was involved in the medivac configuration planning for the C-17 in the couple of years after Desert Storm. I never got to fly in the C-17 though.

C-130's will be like the B-52, probably around beyond our own lifespan. They have landed on aircraft carriers. The video is as fake as Astroturf, probably done on someone's flight simulator. I think the C-17's weight would prevent that possibility even if the other parameters could be met. I didn't even watch all of the video, I could tell from the approach it wasn't real, and neither the Navy or USAF is going to put F-35's at risk, as there were a bunch of them parked on the deck, preventing any possibility of a bolter for the Globemaster.

The 141 is not a bad ride but the C-5 is the best. Never been in a C-17 and never want to ride in a Herc again!

 

[CalifEd]

I'm guessing they will eventually replace the C 141. We're still gonna need a lot of C 130's though.

Currently, the US has 223 C-17's but if the US is going to be moving into the worlds hot spots, we will need many, many more aircraft and air lift capacity.
One bottleneck of the Gulf War was getting our gear to the conflict area, in quantity and in time.

 

[llowry61]

While fake it was cool to watch.

And as mentioned earlier Doolittle and the boys did what was thought impossible. Those WW2 pilots the test pilots post war and NASA guys and gals had some stones. I believe in the lack of old bold pilots school of thought.

 

[Hair Trigger]

The 141 is not a bad ride but the C-5 is the best. Never been in a C-17 and never want to ride in a Herc again!

Never flown in the C-5, either. I do have about 30 hrs in the C-130 and was a qualified medical aircrew for them, but I agree with you. Noisy and not as smooth as the jets. We called it the "4-fan trash can".

 

[Gamecock]

I don't know why the new catch phrase for computer graphics animation is AI. Why doesn't AI catch the obvious errors and simplifications, no thrust reverser doors opening, abrupt accelerations and stoppings, no deck hands walking about, one and on? That said the animation is getting better each year.

AI is a marketing term.

 

[SmithNut]

Was that a Chinese or Russian aircraft carrier??

Never seen a US carrier with an up angled flight deck at the end of the take-off area....

 

[Rustyt1953]

For verification of my own hypothesis I ran this by the boys. Logan saw C-17 and aircraft carrier in the title and said: "no need to watch".

JR watched it and said: "computer".

 

[SMSgt]

They built an airstrip at nearby Camp Shelby, Ms. for these large aircraft. They come from all over the country for "touch and goes" and practice short runway landings and "touch and go" cargo delivery. A good friend is a crew chief on one of them and got me, my son and daughter, and very excited grandson onto the railing around the flight tower to watch the plane in action. They have also done several flyovers at low altitude at several Southern Miss football games. They can haul a lot of stuff, including bombs, bunker busters, and other bangy stuff. I see them flying around here several times a week so I guess they do a lot of training. I'm guessing they will eventually replace the C 141. We're still gonna need a lot of C 130's though.

C-141s have been retired for some time now.

 

[GaryS]

If they parked it like some of the people I've seen in Walmart parking lots, they would have knocked the island over into the sea.

The the park it like parking their Hyundai at Wally Mart.

 

[rwsmith]

No arrestor hook.....

Ok. now that it's there let see it catapult off. Oh, they have one:

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSnbcmpSGGE[/ame]

The water doesn't look right.

 

[fordson]

They need to do more research on carrier ops….
…… we have no “ski jump” carriers…
…… no visible cross deck arresting wire/cables….
…… no ships wake at 30+ knots…..
…… no deck handlers directing aircraft movements
….. on, and on missing details …… but a good sim all the same…….

 

[Inkgardener]

Ok. now that it's there let see it catapult off. Oh, they have one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSnbcmpSGGE

The water doesn't look right.

She would have done the worlds largest cannonball straight into the ocean!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mainsail]

The 141 is not a bad ride but the C-5 is the best. Never been in a C-17 and never want to ride in a Herc again!

As a crew member the C-141 was the best of the cargo jets, all much better than tankers or anything with a capital E in the name.

The C5 broke too much, so they didn't send them to the kinds of places you'd never convince your wife to go on vacation- cool spots all over Africa, Central, and South America. The C-141s and C-130s did it all, even Antarctica.

C-130s went to even more remote locations, but noisy, vibrate-y, and sloooow.

For those of us the crewed them, the Starlifter was hands-down the best.

 

[Hair Trigger]

Ok. now that it's there let see it catapult off. Oh, they have one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSnbcmpSGGE

The water doesn't look right.

There's a lot more than just the water that is wrong. Just in the still shot of the C-17 on the stern, it's obvious there's not enough room off the bow for the wingspan of the Globemaster without it taking a bunch of F-35's out with the right wing as it launches. My SIL has a very good flight simulator (he practices flying with it and he flies B737's for real) and it can be set up for some really unrealistic scenarios that could never occur in reality. (He set it up to take off in a C-5 Galaxy from Lukla Airport once, to see what it would do) Lukla is a one-way in/out short field (1729 feet) that ends in a cliff and is in Nepal at an elevation of 9337 ft MSL.

 

[jdh]

And the catapult

British carrier made for the Harrier. Ski jump, no cat.

 

[bobsguns]

Very cool. There is another video showing it taking off too. Something looks off here somehow though. Maybe some very good CG or AI work? How is there a camera in the locations for shots? A little more evident in the take off video.

Fake.

There's no flight line crew to be seen anywhere. No crew anywhere, for that matter.

There was a C130 that did land on an A/C during the Viet Nam era. The tv show JAG even included it in an episode.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

This C-17 was flying around looking for a Carrier.
Not many in NM!

 

[SMSgt]

Fake.

There's no flight line crew to be seen anywhere. No crew anywhere, for that matter.

There was a C130 that did land on an A/C during the Viet Nam era. The tv show JAG even included it in an episode.

They've landed and launched U-2s off carriers before. Someone finally wised up and figured out it wasn't necessary.