Saturday, 4 January 2014

Walid Shoebat: Liberal Elites Appease Islam Because of Agreement Not Naivete

Walid Shoebat: Liberal Elites Appease Islam Because of Agreement Not Naivete

 

 

 




 


Walid Shoebat: Liberal Elites Appease Islam Because of Agreement Not Naivete by TalkerOne


Walid Shoebat: Liberal Elites Appease Islam Because of Agreement Not Naivete

 

Walid Shoebat: Liberal Elites Appease Islam Because of Agreement Not Naivete

 

Founding

Conceived by the Arab states at the first Arab summit meeting, the 1964 Arab League summit (Cairo), its stated goal was the "liberation of Palestine" through armed struggle. The organization was called Palestinian Liberation Organization.[10] The original PLO Charter (issued on 28 May 1964[11]) stated that "Palestine with its boundaries that existed at the time of the British mandate is an integral regional unit" and sought to "prohibit... the existence and activity" of Zionism.[10] It also called for a right of return and self-determination for Palestinians. Palestinian statehood was not mentioned, although in 1974 the PLO called for an independent state in the territory of Mandate Palestine.[12] The group used multi-layered guerrilla tactics to attack Israel from their bases in Jordan (including the West Bank), Lebanon, Egypt (Gaza Strip), and Syria.[13]

Politics

See also: Politics of the Palestinian National Authority and Politics of the State of Palestine

Organization


Orient House, the former PLO headquarters in Jerusalem
The PLO has a nominal legislative body, the Palestinian National Council (PNC), but most actual political power and decisions are controlled by the PLO Executive Committee, made up of 18 people elected by the PNC. The PLO incorporates a range of generally secular ideologies of different Palestinian movements committed to the struggle for Palestinian independence and liberation, hence the name of the organization. The Palestine Liberation Organization is considered by the Arab League[4][14] and by the United Nations[15] to be the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and holds a permanent observer seat in the United Nations General Assembly. It has been widely criticized, however, over the lack of Hamas presence in the Organization, even after Hamas won almost two-thirds of the seats in the 2006 legislative council elections.[citation needed]
Yasser Arafat was the Chairman of the PLO Executive Committee from 1969 until his death in 2004. He was succeeded by Mahmoud Abbas (also known as Abu Mazen).
Initially, as an armed guerrilla organization, the PLO was responsible for violent actions performed against Israel in the 1970s and early 1980s, regarded as terroristic activities by Israel and regarded as a war of liberation by the PLO. In 1988, however, the PLO officially endorsed a two-state solution, contingent on terms such as making East Jerusalem capital of the Palestinian state and giving Palestinians the right of return to land occupied by Palestinians prior to 1948, as well as the right to continue armed struggle until the end of "The Zionist Entity."[16] In 1996, the PLO nullified the articles of the PLO's Charter, or parts of it, which called for the destruction of Israel and for armed resistance.[17]
Other institutions are the Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Central Council (PCC) which consists of 124 members from the PLO Executive Committee, PNC, PLC and other Palestinian organizations.[18] The PCC makes policy decisions when PNC is not in session, acting as a link between the PNC and the PLO-EC. The PCC is elected by the PNC and chaired by the PNC speaker.[19]

Membership

The PLO has no central decision-making or mechanism that enables it to directly control its factions, but they are supposed to follow the PLO charter and Executive Committee decisions. Membership has fluctuated, and some organizations have left the PLO or suspended membership during times of political turbulence, but most often these groups eventually rejoined the organization. Not all PLO activists are members of one of the factions – for example, many PNC delegates are elected as independents.[citation needed]
Present members include:
Former member groups of the PLO include:

History

Creation

The Arab League in Cairo Summit 1964 initiated the creation of an organization representing the Palestinian people.[21]
The Palestinian National Council convened in Jerusalem on 28 May 1964. Concluding this meeting the PLO was founded on 2 June 1964. Its Statement of Proclamation of the Organization[22] declared "... the right of the Palestinian Arab people to its sacred homeland Palestine and affirming the inevitability of the battle to liberate the usurped part from it, and its determination to bring out its effective revolutionary entity and the mobilization of the capabilities and potentialities and its material, military and spiritual forces".
Due to the influence of the Egyptian President Nasser, the PLO supported 'Pan-Arabism', as advocated by him – this was the ideology that the Arabs should live in one state. The first executive committee was formed on 9 August, with Ahmad Shuqeiri as its leader.[citation needed]
In spite of the 1949 Armistice Agreements, the Arab states remained unreconciled to Israel's creation as they had been to the proposed partition of Palestine in 1948. Therefore, the Palestinian National Charter of 1964[23] stated: "The claims of historic and spiritual ties between Jews and Palestine are not in agreement with the facts of history or with the true basis of sound statehood... [T]he Jews are not one people with an independent personality because they are citizens to their states." (Article 18).
Although Egypt and Jordan supported the creation of a Palestinian state on land that they recognised as being occupied by Israel, they would not grant sovereignty to the Palestinian people in lands under Jordanian and Egyptian military occupation, amounting to 53% of the territory allocated to Arabs under the UN Partition Plan. Hence, Article 24: "This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank, the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area."

Executive Committee Chairmen

(in exile in Jordan to April 1971; Lebanon 1971 – December 1982; and Tunis December 1982 – May 1994)
(acting [for Arafat] to 11 November 2004)

Leadership by Yasser Arafat

The resounding defeat of Syria, Jordan and Egypt in the Six Day War of 1967 destroyed the credibility of Arab states that had fought to be patrons for the Palestinian people and their nationalist cause. The war radicalized the Palestinians and significantly weakened Nasser's influence. The way was opened, particularly after the Battle of Karameh in March 1968, for Yasser Arafat to rise to power.[citation needed] He advocated guerrilla warfare and successfully sought to make the PLO a fully independent organization under the control of the fedayeen organizations. At the Palestinian National Congress meeting of 1969, Fatah gained control of the executive bodies of the PLO. Arafat was appointed PLO chairman at the Palestinian National Congress in Cairo on 4 February 1969.[24][25] From then on, the Executive Committee was composed essentially of representatives of the various member organizations.
The PLO at this time did not clearly either accept or reject a two state solution. According to Israeli Likud leader Menachem Begin, the PLO at this time was 'a Nazi organization' and its charter 'an Arabic Mein Kampf'.[26]

War of attrition

From 1969 to September 1970 the PLO, with passive support from Jordan, fought a war of attrition with Israel. During this time, the PLO launched artillery attacks on the moshavim and kibbutzim of Bet Shean Valley Regional Council, while fedayeen launched numerous attacks on Israeli forces. Israel raided the PLO camps in Jordan, withdrawing only under Jordanian military pressure.[citation needed]
This conflict culminated in Jordan's expulsion of the PLO to Lebanon in July 1971.

Black September in Jordan

Main article: Black September in Jordan
The PLO suffered a major reversal with the Jordanian assault on its armed groups in the events known as Black September in 1970. The Palestinian groups were expelled from Jordan, and during the 1970s, the PLO was effectively an umbrella group of eight organizations headquartered in Damascus and Beirut, all devoted to armed resistance to either Zionism or Israeli occupation, using methods which included direct clashing and guerrilla warfare against Israel. After Black September, the Cairo Agreement led the PLO to establish itself in Lebanon.

Ten Point Program

In 1974, the PNC approved the Ten Point Program[27] formulated by Fatah's leaders, which calls for the establishment of a national authority over any piece of captured Palestinian land, and to actively pursue the establishment of a democratic state in Israel/Palestine. The Ten Point Program was considered the first attempt by PLO at a peaceful resolution, though the ultimate goal was "completing the liberation of all Palestinian territory, and as a step along the road to comprehensive Arab unity."[27]
Despite the fact that the ten point program calls for the elimination of Israel, it led to several radical PLO factions (such as the PFLP, PFLP-GC and others) which also fought to eliminate Israel, breaking out to form the Rejectionist Front, which would act independently of PLO over the following years. Suspicion between the Arafat-led mainstream and more hard-line factions, inside and outside the PLO, have continued to dominate the inner workings of the organization ever since, often resulting in paralysis or conflicting courses of action. A temporary closing of ranks came in 1977, as Palestinian factions joined with hard-line Arab governments in the Steadfastness and Confrontation Front to condemn Egyptian attempts to reach a separate peace with Israel (eventually resulting in the 1979 Camp David Accords).
Israel claimed to see the Ten Point Program as dangerous, because it allegedly allows the Palestinian leadership to enter negotiations with Israel on issues where Israel can compromise, but under the intention of exploiting the compromises in order to "improve positions" for attacking Israel. The Hebrew term for this is the "Plan of Stages" (Tokhnit HaSHlabim). During the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in the 1990s, some Israelis repeated this suspicion, claiming that the Palestinians' willingness to compromise was just a smoke-screen to implement the Ten Point Program. After the Oslo Accords were signed, Israeli right-wing politicians claimed (and still claim) that this was part of the ploy to implement the Stage Program as Yasser Arafat himself admitted in Arabic many times. The Ten Point Program was never officially cancelled by the Palestinians.[28]

Lebanon and the Lebanese Civil War

Main articles: Palestinian insurgency in South Lebanon and Lebanese Civil War
In the late 1960s, and especially after the expulsion of the Palestinian militants from Jordan in Black September events in 1970–1971, Lebanon had become the base for PLO operations. Palestinian militant organizations relocated their headquarters to South Lebanon, and relying on the support in Palestinian refugee camps, waged a campaign of attacks on the Galilee and on Israeli and Jewish targets worldwide. Increasing penetration of Palestinians into Lebanese politics and Israeli retaliations gradually deteriorated the situation.
By the mid-1970s, Arafat and his Fatah movement found themselves in a tenuous position.[citation needed] Arafat increasingly called for diplomacy, perhaps best symbolized by his Ten Points Program and his support for a UN Security Council resolution proposed in 1976 calling for a two-state settlement on the pre-1967 borders.[citation needed] But the Rejectionist Front denounced the calls for diplomacy, and a diplomatic solution was vetoed by the United States.[citation needed] In 1975, the increasing tensions between Palestinian militants and Christian militias exploded into the Lebanese Civil War, involving all factions. On 20 January 1976, the PLO took part in the Damour massacre in retaliation to the Karantina massacre. The PLO and Lebanese National Movement attacked the Christian town of Damour, killing 684 civilians and forcing the remainder of the towns population to flee. In 1976 Syria joined the war by invading Lebanon, which began the 29‑year Syrian occupation of Lebanon, and in 1978 Israel invaded South Lebanon, in response to the Coastal Road Massacre, executed by Palestinian militants based in Lebanon.
The population in the West Bank and Gaza Strip saw Arafat as their best hope for a resolution to the conflict.[citation needed] This was especially so in the aftermath of the Camp David Accords of 1978 between Israel and Egypt, which the Palestinians saw as a blow to their aspirations to self-determination.[citation needed] Abu Nidal, a sworn enemy of the PLO since 1974,[citation needed] assassinated the PLO's diplomatic envoy to the European Economic Community, which in the Venice Declaration of 1980 had called for the Palestinian right of self-determination to be recognized by Israel.
Opposition to Arafat was fierce not only among radical Arab groups, but also among many on the Israeli right.[citation needed] This included Menachem Begin, who had stated on more than one occasion that even if the PLO accepted UN Security Council Resolution 242 and recognized Israel's right to exist, he would never negotiate with the organization.[29][verification needed] This contradicted the official United States position that it would negotiate with the PLO if the PLO accepted Resolution 242 and recognized Israel, which the PLO had thus far been unwilling to do. Other Arab voices had recently called for a diplomatic resolution to the hostilities in accord with the international consensus, including Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat on his visit to Washington, DC in August 1981, and Crown Prince Fahd of Saudi Arabia in his 7 August peace proposal; together with Arafat's diplomatic maneuver, these developments made Israel's argument that it had "no partner for peace" seem increasingly problematic. Thus, in the eyes of Israeli hard-liners, "the Palestinians posed a greater challenge to Israel as a peacemaking organization than as a military one".[30]
After the appointment of Ariel Sharon to the post of Minister of defence in 1981, the Israeli government policy of allowing political growth to occur in the occupied West Bank and Gaza strip changed. The Israeli government tried, unsuccessfully, to dictate terms of political growth by replacing local pro-PLO leaders with an Israeli civil administration.[31]
In 1982, after an attack on a senior Israeli diplomat by Lebanon-based Palestinian militants in Lebanon, Israel invaded Lebanon in a much larger scale in coordination with the Lebanese Christian militias, reaching Beirut and eventually resulting in ousting of the PLO headquarters in June that year. Low-level Palestinian insurgency in Lebanon continued in parallel with the consolidation of Shia militant organizations, but became a secondary concern to Israeli military and other Lebanese factions. With ousting of the PLO, the Lebanese Civil War gradually turned into a prolonged conflict, shifting from mainly PLO-Christian conflict into involvement of all Lebanese factions – whether Sunni, Shia, Druze, and Christians.

Tunis

In 1982, the PLO relocated to Tunis, Tunisia after it was driven out of Lebanon by Israel during Israel's six-month invasion of Lebanon. Following massive raids by Israeli forces in Beirut, it is estimated that 8,000 PLO fighters evacuated the city and dispersed.[32]
On 1 October 1985, in Operation Wooden Leg, Israeli Air Force F-15s bombed the PLO's Tunis headquarters, killing more than 60 people.
It is suggested that the Tunis period (1982–1991) was a negative point in the PLO's history, leading up to the Oslo negotiations and formation of the Palestinian Authority (PA). The PLO in exile was distant from a concentrated number of Palestinians and became far less effective.[33] There was a significant reduction in centres of research, political debates or journalistic endeavours that had encouraged an energised public presence of the PLO in Beirut. More and more Palestinians were abandoned, and many felt that this was the beginning of the end.[34]

First Intifada

Main article: First Intifada
In 1987, the First Intifada broke out in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Intifada caught the PLO by surprise,[35] and the leadership abroad could only indirectly influence the events. A new local leadership emerged, the Unified National Leadership of the Uprising (UNLU), comprising many leading Palestinian factions. After King Hussein of Jordan proclaimed the administrative and legal separation of the West Bank from Jordan in 1988,[36] the Palestine National Council adopted the Palestinian Declaration of Independence in Algiers, proclaiming an independent State of Palestine. The declaration made reference to UN resolutions without explicitly mentioning Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.
A month later, Arafat declared in Geneva that the PLO would support a solution of the conflict based on these Resolutions. Effectively, the PLO recognized Israel's right to exist within pre-1967 borders, with the understanding that the Palestinians would be allowed to set up their own state in the West Bank and Gaza. The United States accepted this clarification by Arafat and began to allow diplomatic contacts with PLO officials. The Proclamation of Independence did not lead to statehood, although over 100 states recognised the State of Palestine.

Persian Gulf War

Main article: Palestinian exodus from Kuwait (Gulf War)
After the Gulf War in 1991, Kuwaiti authorities forcibly pressured nearly 200,000 Palestinians to leave Kuwait.[37] The policy which partly led to this exodus was a response to the alignment of PLO leader Yasser Arafat with Saddam Hussein.

Oslo Accords

In 1993, the PLO secretly negotiated the Oslo Accords with Israel.[38] The accords were signed on 20 August 1993.[38] There was a subsequent public ceremony in Washington D.C. on 13 September 1993 with Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin.[39] The Accords granted the Palestinians right to self-government on the Gaza Strip and the city of Jericho in the West Bank through the creation of the Palestinian Authority. Yasser Arafat was appointed head of the Palestinian Authority and a timetable for elections was laid out which saw Arafat elected president in January 1996, 18 months behind schedule.[citation needed] Although the PLO and the PA are not formally linked, the PLO dominates the administration. The headquarters of the PLO were moved to Ramallah on the West Bank.[2][3]
On 9 September 1993, Arafat issued a press release stating that "the PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security".[40]
Some Palestinian officials have stated that the peace treaty must be viewed as permanent.[citation needed] According to some opinion polls, a majority of Israelis believe Palestinians should have a state of their own—a major shift in attitude after the Oslo Accord—even though both Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres opposed the creation of a Palestinian state, both before and after the Accord.[citation needed] At the same time, a significant portion of the Israeli public and some political leaders (including the current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) express doubt over whether a peaceful, coherent state can be founded by the PLO, and call for significant re-organization, including the elimination of all terrorism, before any talk about independence.[citation needed]

Second Intifada

Main article: Al-Aqsa Intifada
The Second or Al-Aqsa Intifada started concurrent with the breakdown of talks at Camp David with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. The Intifada never ended officially, but violence hit relatively low levels during 2005. The death toll both military and civilians of the entire conflict in 2000–2004 is estimated to be 3,223 Palestinians and 950 Israelis, although this number is criticized for not differentiating between combatants and civilians.[citation needed] Members of the PLO have claimed responsibility for a number of attacks against Israelis during the Second Intifada[citation needed].

Palestinian National Charter

Main article: Palestinian National Charter

Status at the United Nations

Further information: State of Palestine, International recognition of the State of Palestine, List of current Permanent Representatives to the United Nations § United Nations General Assembly observers and Category:Permanent Observers of Palestine to the United Nations
The United Nations General Assembly recognized the PLO as the "representative of the Palestinian people" in Resolution 3210 and Resolution 3236, and granted the PLO observer status on 22 November 1974 in Resolution 3237. On 12 January 1976 the UN Security Council voted 11–1 with 3 abstentions to allow the Palestinian Liberation Organization to participate in a Security Council debate without voting rights, a privilege usually restricted to UN member states. It was admitted as a full member of the Asia group on 2 April 1986.[41][42][43]
After the Palestinian Declaration of Independence the PLO's representation was renamed Palestine.[44] On 7 July 1998, this status was extended to allow participation in General Assembly debates, though not in voting.[45]
By September 2012, with their application for full membership stalled due to the inability of Security Council members to 'make a unanimous recommendation', the Palestine Authority had decided to pursue an upgrade in status from "observer entity" to "non-member observer state". On 27 November it was announced that the appeal had been officially made, and would be put to a vote in the General Assembly on November 29, where their status upgrade was expected to be supported by a majority of states. In addition to granting Palestine "non-member observer state status", the draft resolution "expresses the hope that the Security Council will consider favourably the application submitted on 23 September 2011 by the State of Palestine for admission to full membership in the United Nations, endorses the two state solution based on the pre-1967 borders, and stresses the need for an immediate resumption of negotiations between the two parties."
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, In a 138-9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[46][47] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See.The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[48]
The vote was a historic benchmark for the sovereign State of Palestine and its citizens, whilst it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialised UN agencies, such as the International Civil Aviation Organisation,[49] the Law of the Seas Treaty and the International Criminal Court. It shall permit Palestine to claim legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognised by the UN. It shall also provide the citizens of Palestine with the right to sue for control of the territory that is rightfully theirs in the International Court of Justice and with the legal right to bring war-crimes charges, mainly those relating to Israel's unlawful occupation of the State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[50]
The UN has authorised Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as 'The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations',[51] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports,[47][52] whilst it has instructed its diplomats to officially represent 'The State of Palestine', as opposed to the 'Palestine National Authority'.[47] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of 'State of Palestine' shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents".[53]

Diplomatic representation

Main article: Foreign relations of the Palestine Liberation Organization
See also: Category:Ambassadors of Palestine
The Palestine Information Office was registered with the Justice Department of the United States as a foreign agent until 1968, when it was closed. It was reopened in 1989 as the Palestine Affairs Center.[54] The PLO Mission office, in Washington D.C was opened in 1994, and represented the PLO in the United States. On 20 July 2010, the United States Department of State agreed to upgrade the status of the PLO Mission in the United States to "General Delegation of the PLO".[55]

Recognition by Israel and the Oslo Accords

Further information: Palestinian views on the peace process § Yasser Arafat and the_PLO
In 1993, PLO chairman Yasser Arafat recognized the State of Israel in an official letter to its prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin. In response to Arafat's letter, Israel decided to revert its stance toward the PLO and to recognize the organization as the representative of the Palestinian people.[40][56] This led to the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993.

Political status and actions

The PLO began their militancy campaign from its inception with an attack on Israel's National Water Carrier in January 1965.[21] The PLO was designated a terrorist organization by the United States in 1987,[57][58] but in 1988 a presidential waiver was issued which permitted contact with the organization.[21] The United States attempted to prosecute Yasser Arafat for his complicity in the assassination of two U.S diplomats.[59] Israel considered the PLO to be a terrorist organization until the Madrid Conference in 1991.[21] Most of the rest of the world recognized the PLO as the legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people from the mid-1970s onwards (after the PLO's admission to the UN as an observer.)[60]
The most notable of what were considered terrorist acts committed by member organizations of the PLO were:

See also

Wikisource has original text related to this article:


Palestine Liberation Organization
منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية
Munaẓẓamat at-Taḥrīr al-Filasṭīniyyah
Leader Mahmoud Abbas
Founded 28 May 1964[1]
Headquarters Ramallah, West Bank[2][3]
Ideology Palestinian nationalism,
Social democracy
Party flag
Flag of Palestine.svg
Politics of the Palestinian territories
Political parties
Elections
The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) (Arabic: منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية‎; About this sound Munaẓẓamat at-Taḥrīr al-Filasṭīniyyah (help·info)) is an organization founded in 1964 with the purpose of creating an independent State of Palestine. It is recognized as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people" by over 100 states with which it holds diplomatic relations,[4][5] and has enjoyed observer status at the United Nations since 1974.[6][7][8] The PLO was considered by the United States and Israel to be a terrorist organization until the Madrid Conference in 1991. In 1993, the PLO recognized Israel's right to exist in peace, accepted UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, and rejected "violence and terrorism"; in response, Israel officially recognized the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people.[9]

 

Posted by at No comments:

Friday, 3 January 2014

Worlds Largest Aircraft ~ Even Bigger Than A380

Worlds Largest Aircraft ~ Even Bigger Than A380 

 

Worlds Largest Aircraft ~ Even Bigger Than A380

Development

CX-X and Heavy Logistics System

In 1961, several aircraft companies began studying heavy jet transport designs that would replace the Douglas C-133 Cargomaster and complement Lockheed C-141 Starlifters. In addition to higher overall performance, the United States Army wanted a transport aircraft with a larger cargo bay than the C-141, whose interior was too small to carry a variety of their outsized equipment. These studies led to the "CX-4" design concept, but in 1962 the proposed six-engine design was rejected, because it was not viewed as a significant advance over the C-141.[3] By late 1963, the next conceptual design was named CX-X. It was equipped with four engines, instead of six engines in the earlier CX-4 concept. The CX-X had a gross weight of 550,000 pounds (249,000 kg), a maximum payload of 180,000 lb (81,600 kg) and a speed of Mach 0.75 (500 mph or 805 km/h). The cargo compartment was 17.2 ft (5.24 m) wide by 13.5 feet (4.11 m) high and 100 ft (30.5 m) long with front and rear access doors.[3] To provide required power and range with only four engines required a new engine with dramatically improved fuel efficiency.
"We started to build the C-5 and wanted to build the biggest thing we could... Quite frankly, the C-5 program was a great contribution to commercial aviation. We'll never get credit for it, but we incentivized that industry by developing [the TF-39] engine."
General Duane H. Cassidy, former MAC Commander in Chief[4]
The criteria were finalized and an official request for proposal was issued in April 1964 for the "Heavy Logistics System" (CX-HLS) (previously CX-X). In May 1964, proposals for aircraft were received from Boeing, Douglas, General Dynamics, Lockheed, and Martin Marietta. General Electric, Curtiss-Wright, and Pratt & Whitney submitted proposals for the engines. After a downselect, Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed were given one-year study contracts for the airframe, along with General Electric and Pratt & Whitney for the engines.[5] All three of the designs shared a number of features; all three placed the cockpit well above the cargo area to allow for cargo loading through a nose door. The Boeing and Douglas designs used a pod on the top of the fuselage containing the cockpit, while the Lockheed design extended the cockpit profile down the length of the fuselage, giving it an egg-shaped cross section. All of the designs had swept wings, as well as front and rear cargo doors allowing simultaneous loading and unloading. Lockheed's design featured a T-tail, while the designs by Boeing and Douglas had conventional tails.[6]
The Air Force considered Boeing's design better than that of Lockheed, although Lockheed's proposal was the lowest total cost bid.[7] Lockheed was selected the winner in September 1965, then awarded a contract in December 1965.[6][8] General Electric's TF-39 engine was selected in August 1965 to power the new transport plane.[6] At the time GE's engine concept was revolutionary, as all engines beforehand had a bypass ratio of less than two-to-one, while the TF-39 promised and would achieve a ratio of eight-to-one, which had the benefits of increased engine thrust and lower fuel consumption.[9][10]

Into production

"After being one of the worst-run programs, ever, in its early years, it has evolved very slowly and with great difficulty into a nearly adequate strategic airlifter that unfortunately needs in-flight refuelling or a ground stop for even the most routine long-distance flights. We spent a lot of money to make it capable of operating from unfinished airstrips near the front lines, when we never needed that capability or had any intention to use it."
Robert F. Dorr, aviation historian[11]
The first C-5A Galaxy (serial number 66-8303) was rolled out of the manufacturing plant in Marietta, Georgia, on 2 March 1968.[12] On 30 June 1968, flight testing of the C-5A began with the first flight, flown by Leo Sullivan, with the call sign "eight-three-oh-three heavy". Flight tests revealed that the aircraft exhibited a higher drag divergence Mach number than predicted by wind tunnel data. The maximum lift coefficient measured in flight with the flaps deflected 40-degree was higher than predicted (2.60 vs. 2.38), but was lower than predicted with the flaps deflected 25 degrees (2.31 vs. 2.38) and with the flaps retracted (1.45 vs. 1.52).[13]
Aircraft weight was a serious issue during design and development. At the time of the first flight, the weight was below the guaranteed weight, but by the time of the delivery of the 9th aircraft, had exceeded guarantees.[13] In July 1969, during a fuselage upbending test, the wing failed at 128% of limit load, which is below the requirement that it sustain 150% of limit load. Changes were made to the wing, but in a later test, in July 1970, it failed at 125% of limit load. A passive load reduction system, involving uprigged ailerons was incorporated, but the maximum allowable payload was reduced from 220,000 pounds to 190,000 pounds. At the time, it was predicted that there was a 90% probability that no more than 10% of the fleet of 79 airframes would reach their fatigue life of 19,000 hours without cracking of the wing.[13]
Four-engine jet transport with dark green and gray paint scheme in-flight above clouds.
The fourth C-5A Galaxy 66-8306 in 1980s European One color scheme
Cost overruns and technical problems of the C-5A were the subject of a congressional investigation in 1968 and 1969.[14][15] The C-5 program has the dubious distinction of being the first development program with a one billion dollar overrun.[8][16] Due to the C-5's troubled development, the Department of Defense abandoned Total Package Procurement.[17] In 1969 Henry Durham raised concerns about the C-5 production process with Lockheed, his employer; subsequently Durham was transferred and subjected to abuse until he resigned. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) substantiated some of his charges against Lockheed; later the American Ethical Union honored Durham with the Elliott-Black Award.[18]
Upon completion of testing in December 1969, the first C-5A was transferred to the Transitional Training Unit at Altus Air Force Base, Oklahoma. Lockheed delivered the first operational Galaxy to the 437th Airlift Wing, Charleston Air Force Base, SC, in June 1970. Due to higher than expected development costs, in 1970 there were public calls for the government to split the substantial losses that Lockheed were experiencing.[19] Production was nearly brought to a halt in 1971 due to Lockheed going through financial difficulties, partly down to the C-5 Galaxy's development but also a civilian jet liner, the Lockheed L-1011.[20] The U.S. government gave loans to Lockheed to keep the company operational.[21]
In the early 1970s, NASA considered the C-5 for the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft role, to transport the Space Shuttle to Kennedy Space Center. However, they rejected it in favor of the Boeing 747, in part due to the 747's low-wing design.[22] In contrast, the Soviet Union chose to transport its shuttles using the high-winged An-225,[23] which derives from the An-124, which is similar in design and function to the C-5.
During static and fatigue testing cracks were noticed in the wings of several aircraft,[16] and as a consequence the C-5A fleet was restricted to 80% of maximum design loads. To reduce wing loading, load alleviation systems were added to the aircraft.[24] By 1980, payloads were restricted to as low as 50,000 lb (23,000 kg) for general cargo during peacetime operations. A $1.5 billion program, known as H-Mod,[25] to re-wing the 76 completed C-5As to restore full payload capability and service life began in 1976.[26][27] After design and testing of the new wing design, the C-5As received their new wings from 1980 to 1987.[28][29] During 1976, numerous cracks were also found in the fuselage along the upper fuselage on the centerline, aft of the refueling port, extending back to the wing. The cracks required a redesign to the hydraulic system for the visor, the front cargo entry point.[citation needed]

Continued production and development

In 1974, Iran, then holding good relations with the United States, offered $160 million to restart C-5 production to enable Iran to purchase aircraft for their own air force;[30][31] in a similar climate as to their acquisition of F-14 Tomcat fighters.[32] However no C-5 aircraft were ever ordered by Iran, as the prospect was firmly halted by the Iranian Revolution in 1979.[33][34]
A Galaxy undergoing the AMP and RERP upgrades, to become a C-5M.
As part of President Ronald Reagan's military policy, funding was made available for expansion of the USAF's airlift capability. With the C-17 program still some years from completion, Congress approved funding for a new version of the C-5, the C-5B, in July 1982 to expand airlift capacity.[35][36][37] The first C-5B was delivered to Altus Air Force Base in January 1986. In April 1989, the last of 50 C-5B aircraft was added to the 77 C-5As in the Air Force's airlift force structure. The C-5B includes all C-5A improvements and numerous additional system modifications to improve reliability and maintainability.[38]
In 1998, the Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) began upgrading the C-5's avionics to include a glass cockpit, navigation equipment, and a new autopilot system.[39] Another part of the C-5 modernization effort is the Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP). The program will mainly replace the engines with newer, more powerful ones. Three C-5s underwent RERP as a test with full production in May 2008.[40]
A total of 52 C-5s are contracted to be modernized, consisting of 49 B-, two C- and one A-model aircraft through the Reliability Enhancement and Re-Engining Program (RERP). Over 70 changes and upgrades are incorporated in the program, including the newer General Electric engines. Five C-5M Super Galaxies have been produced.[41] The RERP upgrade program is to be completed in 2016.[42]

Design

Overview

The C-5 is a large high-wing cargo aircraft. It has a distinctive high T-tail, 25-degree wing sweep, and four TF39 turbofan engines mounted on pylons beneath the wings. The C-5 is similar in layout to its smaller predecessor, the C-141 Starlifter. The C-5 has 12 internal wing tanks and is equipped for aerial refueling. It has both nose and aft doors for "drive-through" loading and unloading of cargo.[43] The C-5 is also known as FRED (fucking,[N 1] ridiculous, economic/environmental disaster)[46] by its crews due to its maintenance/reliability issues and large consumption of fuel.[46]
Excavators inside a C-5. Loadmasters ensure cargo is secured and balanced before takeoff.
It has an upper deck seating area for 73 passengers and two loadmasters. The passengers face the rear of the aircraft, rather than forward. Its takeoff and landing distances, at maximum gross weight, are 8,300 ft (2,500 m) and 4,900 ft (1,500 m) respectively. Its high flotation main landing gear has 28 wheels to share the weight. The rear main landing gear is steerable for a smaller turning radius and it rotates 90 degrees horizontally before it is retracted after takeoff. The "kneeling" landing gear system permits lowering of the parked aircraft so the cargo floor is at truck-bed height to facilitate vehicle loading and unloading.[47]
The C-5 has a Malfunction Detection Analysis and Recording (MADAR) system to identify errors throughout the aircraft.
C-5 Galaxy after taking off
The C-5 features a cargo compartment 121 ft (37 m) long, 13.5 ft (4.1 m) high, and 19 ft (5.8 m) wide, or just over 31,000 cu ft (880 m3). The compartment can accommodate up to 36 463L master pallets or a mix of palletized cargo and vehicles. The cargo hold of the C-5 is a foot longer than the entire length of the first powered flight by the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk.[48] The nose and aft doors open the full width and height of the cargo compartment to permit faster and easier loading. Ramps are full width at each end for loading double rows of vehicles.[43]
The Galaxy is capable of carrying nearly every type of the Army's combat equipment, including bulky items such as the 74 short tons (67 t) armored vehicle launched bridge (AVLB), from the United States to any location on the globe.[43] A C-5 is capable of transporting up to six Boeing AH-64 Apaches or five Bradley Fighting Vehicles.[29]

Operational history

Personnel unload cargo from a C-5 Galaxy at Pegasus Field, an ice runway near McMurdo Station, Antarctica in 1989.
The first C-5A was delivered to the USAF on 17 December 1969. Wings were built up in the early 1970s at Altus AFB, Oklahoma; Charleston AFB, South Carolina; Dover AFB, Delaware; and Travis AFB, California. The C-5's first mission was on 9 July 1970, in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War.[49] C-5s were used to transport equipment and troops, including Army tanks and even some small aircraft, throughout the later years of the US action in Vietnam.[50] In the final weeks of the war, prior to the Fall of Saigon, several C-5s were involved in evacuation efforts; during one such mission a C-5A crashed while transporting a large number of orphans.[51]
C-5s have also been used to deliver support and reinforce various US allies over the years. During the Yom Kippur war in 1973, multiple C-5s and C-141 Starlifters delivered critical supplies of ammunition, replacement weaponry and other forms of aid to Israel, the US effort was named as Operation Nickel Grass.[52][53] The C-5 Galaxy's performance in Israel was such that the Pentagon began to consider further purchases.[54] The C-5 was regularly made available to support American allies, such as the British-led peacekeeper initiative in Zimbabwe in 1979.[55]
On 24 October 1974, the Space and Missile Systems Organization successfully conducted an Air Mobile Feasibility Test where a C-5A Galaxy aircraft air dropped an 86,000 lb Minuteman ICBM from 20,000 ft over the Pacific Ocean. The missile descended to 8,000 ft before its rocket engine fired. The 10-second engine burn carried the missile to 20,000 ft again before it dropped into the ocean. The test proved the feasibility of launching an intercontinental ballistic missile from the air. Operational deployment was discarded due to engineering and security difficulties, though the capability was used as a negotiating point in the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks.[56][57] Aircraft 69-0014, "Zero-One-Four" used in the test was retired to the Air Mobility Command Museum at Dover Air Force Base.[58]
C-5A Minuteman Air Mobile ICBM Feasibility Demonstration – 24 October 1974
The C-5 has been used for several unusual functions; during the development of the secretive stealth fighter, the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk, Galaxies were often used to carry partly disassembled aircraft, leaving no exterior signs as to their cargo.[59] It remains the largest aircraft to ever operate in the Antarctic;[60] Williams Field near McMurdo Station is capable of handling C-5 aircraft, the first of which landed there in 1989.[61] The C-5 Galaxy was a major supply asset in the international coalition operations in 1990-91 against Iraq in the Gulf War.[62][63][64] C-5s have routinely delivered relief aid and humanitarian supplies to areas afflicted with natural disasters or crisis, multiple flights were made over Rwanda in 1994.[65]
The wings on the C-5As were replaced during the 1980s to restore full design capability.[28] The USAF took delivery of the first C-5B on 28 December 1985 and the final one in April 1989.[66] The reliability of the C-5 fleet has been a continued issue throughout its lifetime,[67][68] however the C-5M upgrade program seeks in part to address this issue.[40] Their strategic airlift capacity has been a key logistical component of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq; following an incident during Operation Iraqi Freedom where one C-5 was damaged by a projectile, the installation of defensive systems has become a stated priority.[69]
The C-5 AMP and RERP modernization programs plan to raise mission-capable rate to a minimum goal of 75%.[40] Over the next 40 years, the U.S. Air Force estimates the C-5M will save over $20 billion.[70] The first C-5M conversion was completed on 16 May 2006; C-5Ms began test flights at Dobbins Air Reserve Base in June 2006.[70] The USAF decided to convert remaining C-5Bs and C-5Cs into C-5Ms with avionics upgrades and re-engining in February 2008.[71] The C-5As will receive only the avionics upgrades.[71][72]
A C-5 taking off from Robins AFB
In response to Air Force motions towards the retirement of the C-5 Galaxy, Congress implemented legislation that placed set limits upon retirement plans for C-5A models in 2003.[73] As of November, 2013 45 C-5As have been retired; 11 have been scrapped, parts of one (A/C 66-8306) are now a cargo load trainer at Lackland AFB, Texas and one was sent to the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (WR-ALC) for tear down and inspection to evaluate structural integrity and estimate the remaining life for the fleet.[74]
The U.S. Air Force began to receive refitted C-5M aircraft in December 2008.[75] full production of C-5Ms began in the summer of 2009.[76] In 2009, the Congressional ban on the retirement of C-5s was overturned.[77] The Air Force seeks to retire one C-5A for each 10 new C-17s ordered.[78] In October 2011, the 445th Airlift Wing based at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base retired or reassigned all of its remaining C-5s; it has since reequipped with C-17s.[79] Sixteen C-5M aircraft have been delivered as of December 2013.[80] The C-5Ms have been delivered late from the production schedule due to unspecified complications.[citation needed]
On 13 September 2009, a C-5M set 41 new records; flight data was submitted to the National Aeronautic Association for formal recognition. The C-5M had carried a payload of 176,610 lb (80,110 kg) to over 41,100 ft (12,500 m) in 23 minutes, 59 seconds. Additionally, 33 time to climb records at various payload classes were set, and the world record for greatest payload to 6,562 ft (2,000 m) was broken. The aircraft was in the category of 551,160 to 661,390 lb (250,000 to 300,000 kg) with a takeoff weight of 649,680 lb (294,690 kg) including payload, fuel, and other equipment.[81]

Variants

C-5A

Instrument panel of a C-5A
The C-5A is the original version of the C-5. From 1969 to 1973, 81 C-5As were delivered to U.S. Air Force bases. Due to cracks found in the wings in the mid-1970s, the cargo weight was restricted. To restore the C-5's full capability, the wing structure was redesigned. A program to install new strengthened wings on 77 C-5As was conducted from 1981 to 1987. The redesigned wing made use of a new aluminum alloy that did not exist during the original production.[82]

C-5B

The C-5B is an improved version of the C-5A. It incorporated all modifications and improvements made to the C-5A with improved wings, simplified landing gear, upgraded TF-39-GE-1C turbofan engines and updated avionics. From 1986 to 1989, 50 of the new variant were delivered to the U.S. Air Force.[83][84]

C-5C

The C-5C is a specially modified variant for transporting large cargo. Two C-5s (68-0213 and 68-0216) were modified to have a larger internal cargo capacity to accommodate large payloads, such as satellites. The major modifications were the removal of the rear passenger compartment floor, splitting the rear cargo door in the middle, and installing a new movable aft bulkhead further to the rear.[85] The official C-5 technical manual refers to the version as C-5A(SCM) Space Cargo Modification. Modifications also included adding a second inlet for ground power, which can feed any power-dependent equipment that may form part of the cargo. The two C-5Cs are operated by U.S. Air Force crews for NASA, and are stationed at Travis AFB, California. 68-0216 completed the Avionics Modernization Program in January 2007. 68-213 is currently being upgraded to the M modification.[86]

C-5 AMP and C-5M Super Galaxy

New C-5 cockpit avionics, installed under the Avionics Modernization Program
Following a study showing 80% of the C-5 airframe service life remaining,[87] AMC began an aggressive program to modernize all remaining C-5Bs and C-5Cs and many of the C-5As. The C-5 Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) began in 1998 and includes upgrading avionics to Global Air Traffic Management compliance, improving communications, new flat panel displays, improving navigation and safety equipment, and installing a new autopilot system. The first flight of a C-5 with AMP (85-0004) occurred on 21 December 2002.[88]
The Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program (RERP) began in 2006. It includes new General Electric F138-GE-100 (CF6-80C2) engines, pylons and auxiliary power units, upgrades to aircraft skin and frame, landing gear, cockpit and pressurization systems.[40][89] The CF6 engine produces 22% more thrust (for 50,000 lbf or 220 kN) from each engine,[90] providing a 30% shorter takeoff, a 38% higher climb rate to initial altitude, an increased cargo load and a longer range.[40][91] Upgraded C-5s are designated C-5M Super Galaxy.[92] The C-5M reached initial operating capability (IOC) on 24 February 2014 with 16 aircraft delivered.[93]

L-500

Lockheed also planned a civilian version of the C-5 Galaxy, the L-500, the company designation also used for the C-5 itself. Both passenger and cargo versions of the L-500 were designed. The all-passenger version would have been able to carry up to 1,000 travelers, while the all-cargo version was predicted to be able to carry typical C-5 volume for as little as 2 cents per ton-mile (in 1967 dollars).[94] Although some interest was expressed by carriers, no orders were placed for either L-500 version, due to operational costs caused by low fuel efficiency, a significant concern for a profit-making carrier, even before the oil crisis of the 1970s, keen competition from Boeing's 747, and high costs incurred by Lockheed in developing the C-5 and later, the L-1011 which led to the governmental rescue of the company.[95]

C-5 Shuttle Carrier

Lockheed proposed a twin body C-5 as a shuttle carrier to counter the Conroy Virtus, but the design was turned down.[citation needed]

Operators

People in line to enter the 445th Airlift Wing's first C-5A Galaxy in 2005
A C-5 Galaxy from the Air Force Reserve Command's 433rd Airlift Wing
The C-5 is limited to military and government use. The U.S. Air Force has 79 C-5s (Active: 28, Reserve: 32, ANG: 19) in service as of September 2012.[96]
Military Airlift Command/Air Mobility Command
21st Airlift Squadron 1993-2006
22nd Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1972-
75th Military Airlift Squadron, 1970-92
3d Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1973-2007
9th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1971-
31st Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1989-94
3d Military Airlift Squadron 1970-73
56th Military Airlift Squadron 1969-92
Air Education & Training Command
56th Airlift Squadron 1992-2007
Air Force Reserve
  • 349th Military Airlift Wing/Air Mobility Wing(Associate) - Travis Air Force Base, California
301st Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1973-2006
312th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron, 1973-
  • 433d Military Airlift Wing/Airlift Wing - Kelly/Lackland Air Force Base, Texas
68th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1985-
356th Airlift Squadron 2007-
337th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1987-
89th Airlift Squadron 2006-12
  • 514th Military Airlift Wing/Airlift Wing(Associate) - Dover Air Force Base, Delaware
326th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1973-2007
709th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron 1973-
Air National Guard
137th Military Airlift Squadron/Airlift Squadron - 1985-2012
155th Airlift Squadron 2004-13
167th Airlift Squadron 2006- (scheduled for conversion to C-17 in FY15)
USAF operates 2 C-5Cs for NASA, based at Travis AFB.

Incidents and accidents

C-5A after crash landing at Shemya AFB, Alaska, July 1983
Emergency responders at the scene of a C-5B crash at Dover AFB, Delaware, April 2006
The flight deck from the C-5B crash at Dover AFB in April 2006 being loaded into another C-5
There have been five C-5 Galaxy aircraft lost in crashes along with two class-A losses resulting from ground fire and one loss resulting from damage sustained on the ground, with a combined total of 169 fatalities. There have been at least two other C-5 crashes that resulted in major airframe damage, but the aircraft were repaired and returned to service.

Notable accidents

  • On 27 May 1970, C-5A serial number 67-0172 was destroyed during a ground fire at Palmdale, California after an Air Turbine Motor (ATM) started backwards and quickly overheated, setting the hydraulic system on fire and quickly consuming the aircraft. The engines were not running at the time of the fire. Five crew escaped, but seven firefighters suffered minor injuries fighting the blaze.[97][98]
  • On 17 October 1970, C-5A S/N 66-8303 was destroyed during a ground fire at Marietta, Georgia. The fire started during maintenance in one of the aircraft's 12 fuel cells. One worker was killed and another injured. This was the first C-5 aircraft produced.[98]
  • On 27 September 1974, C-5A 68-0227 crashed after over-running the runway at Clinton, Oklahoma Municipal Airport during an emergency landing following a serious landing gear fire. The crew mistakenly aligned the aircraft for the visual approach into the wrong airport, landing at Clinton Municipal Airport, which has a 4,400 ft (1,300 m) runway—instead of Clinton-Sherman airfield, which has a 13,500 ft (4,100 m) runway. This was the first operational loss of a C-5 Galaxy.[98]
  • On 4 April 1975, C-5A 68-0218 crashed while carrying orphans out of Vietnam during Operation Babylift. This crash is one of the most well known C-5 accidents to date.[51] The crash occurred while trying to make an emergency landing at Tan Son Nhut Air Base Saigon, following a rear pressure door lock failure in flight.[98][99] 144 people (including 78 children) were killed out of the 313 aboard (243 children, 44 escorts, 16 flight crew and 10 medical crew).[100] Use of the C-5 was heavily restricted for several months due to this high profile accident.[101]
  • On 31 July 1983, C-5A 70-0446 crashed on landing at Shemya, Alaska. The C-5 approached below the glide slope, hit an embankment short of the runway and bounced back into the air before coming to rest on the runway. Structural damage was extensive and the two aft main landing gear bogies were sheared from the aircraft. There were no fatalities. A joint USAF/Lockheed team made repairs enabling a one-time ferry flight from Shemya to the Lockheed plant in Marietta, Georgia. There, the aircraft was quickly christened Phoenix II and permanent repair efforts got underway. In addition to the structural repairs, Phoenix II also received an improved landing gear system (common to the then-new C-5B), wing modification, and a color weather radar upgrade. The aircraft was returned to service.[102]
  • In July 1985, C-5A 68-0216 landed wheels (gear) up at Travis Air Force Base, California. There were no injuries. The accident occurred while the crew was performing touch-and-go landings, and did not lower the landing gear during the final approach of the day. The aircraft received significant damage to the lower fuselage and main landing gear pods. The C-5A was later flown to Marietta for repairs. While there, the aircraft was selected to be the first C-5A converted to the C-5C configuration.[103]
  • On 29 August 1990, C-5A 68-0228 crashed following an engine failure shortly after take-off. The aircraft took off from Ramstein Air Base in Germany in support of Operation Desert Shield. It was flown by a nine-member reserve crew from the 68th Airlift Squadron, 433rd Airlift Wing based at Kelly AFB, Texas.[104] As the aircraft started to climb off the runway, one of the thrust reversers suddenly deployed. This resulted in loss of control of the aircraft and the subsequent crash. Of the 17 people on board, only four survived the crash.[105] All four were in the rear troop compartment. The sole crew member to survive, Staff Sgt. Lorenzo Galvan, Jr., was awarded the Airman's Medal for his actions in evacuating the survivors from the wreckage.[98]
  • On 3 April 2006, C-5B 84-0059 crashed following a cockpit indication that a thrust reverser was not locked. The C-5B assigned to the 436th Airlift Wing and flown by a reserve crew from the 709th Airlift Squadron, 512th Airlift Wing crashed about 2,000 ft (610 m) short of the runway while attempting a heavyweight emergency landing at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware. The aircraft had taken off from Dover 21 minutes earlier and reported an in-flight emergency 10 minutes into the flight. All 17 people aboard survived, but two received serious injuries. The Air Force's accident investigation board report concluded the cause to be human error, most notably the crew had been manipulating the throttle of the (dead) number two engine as if it was still running while keeping the (live) number three engine at idle. The situation was further worsened by the crew's decision to use a high flap setting that increased drag beyond normal two engine capabilities.[106][107] The aircraft was one of the first to receive the new avionics and glass flight displays for C-5 avionics modernization program (AMP).[108] This accident led to a redesign of the cockpit engine displays, particularly the visual indicators of a non-active engine.[109] The aircraft was a complete hull-loss and the airframe scrapped, but the forward fuselage became a C-5 AMP test bed.[110]

Specifications (C-5B)

A detail of the C-5's nose assembly raised for loading and unloading.
A General Electric TF39 turbofan engine
Data from Quest for Performance,[111] International Directory of Military Aircraft,[112] and USAF fact sheet[80]
General characteristics
  • Crew: 7 typical (aircraft commander, pilot, two flight engineers, three loadmasters)
    4 minimum (pilot, copilot, two flight engineers)
  • Payload: 270,000 lb (122,470 kg)
  • Length: 247 ft 1 in (75.31 m)
  • Wingspan: 222 ft 9 in (67.89 m)
  • Height: 65 ft 1 in (19.84 m)
  • Wing area: 6,200 ft2 (576 m2)
  • Empty weight: 380,000 lb (172,370 kg)
  • Loaded weight: 769,000 lb (348,800 kg)
  • Max. takeoff weight: 840,000 lb (381,000 kg)
  • Powerplant: 4 × General Electric TF39-GE-1C high-bypass turbofan, 43,000 lbf (190 kN) each
Performance
  • Maximum speed: Mach 0.79 (503 kn, 579 mph, 932 km/h)
  • Cruise speed: Mach 0.77 (919 km/h)
  • Range: 2,400 nmi (2,760 mi, 4,440 km)with a 263,200 lb (119,400 kg) payload
  • Service ceiling: 35,700 ft (10,600 m) at 615,000 lb (279,000 kg) gross weight
  • Rate of climb: 1,800 ft/min (9.14 m/s)
  • Wing loading: 120 lb/ft2 (610 kg/m2)
  • Thrust/weight: 0.22
  • Takeoff roll: 8,400 ft (2,600 m)
  • Landing roll: 3,600 ft (1,100 m)
  • Fuel capacity: 51,150 US gal (193,600 L)

See also

 

Worlds Largest Aircraft ~ Even Bigger Than A380

Lockheed C-5 Galaxy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
C-5 Galaxy
Usaf.c5.galaxy.750pix.jpg
A United States Air Force C-5 in-flight
Role Strategic airlifter
National origin United States
Manufacturer Lockheed
First flight 30 June 1968[1]
Introduction June 1970
Status In service
Primary user United States Air Force
Produced C-5A: 1968–1973
C-5B: 1985–1989
C-5M upgrades: 2006–present
Number built 131 (C-5A: 81, C-5B: 50)
Unit cost
C-5B: US$168 million (1987)[2]
The Lockheed C-5 Galaxy is a large military transport aircraft built by Lockheed. It provides the United States Air Force (USAF) with a heavy intercontinental-range strategic airlift capability, one that can carry outsize and oversize cargos, including all air-certifiable cargo. The Galaxy has many similarities to its smaller C-141 Starlifter predecessor, and the later C-17 Globemaster. The C-5 is among the largest military aircraft in the world.
The C-5 Galaxy had a complicated development; significant cost overruns were experienced and Lockheed suffered significant financial difficulties. Shortly after entering service, fractures in the wings of many aircraft were discovered and the C-5 fleet were restricted in capability until corrective work was conducted. The C-5M Super Galaxy is an upgraded version with new engines and modernized avionics designed to extend its service life beyond 2040.
The C-5 Galaxy has been operated by USAF since 1969. In that time, it has been used to support US military operations in all major conflicts including Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan; as well as in support of allies, such as Israel during the Yom Kippur War and NATO operations in the Gulf War. The C-5 has also been used to distribute humanitarian aid and disaster relief, and support the US Space Shuttle program run by NASA.

 

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)