| Warthog Territory Forums http://www.warthogterritory.net/forum/ |
|
| C-5 crash at Dover Airbase http://www.warthogterritory.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10519 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Dutchy [ 03 Apr 2006, 07:02 ] |
| Post subject: | |
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/03/c5.crash/index.html http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123018410 Salute Dutchy ------------------------ Termites do it in the dark! (47FS Barksdale afb) |
|
| Author: | MICHAEL PIJAR [ 03 Apr 2006, 07:48 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just saw a news report on tv from CNN that the pilot reported that he had a flameout on the #2 engine and was RTB to make an emergency landing. "GLAD TO HAVE BEEN THERE AND HAVE BEEN PROUD TO HAVE SERVERED" |
|
| Author: | 30mike-mike [ 03 Apr 2006, 07:53 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The military has 126 C-5s in its active and reserve inventory,...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>Better make that 125! <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> The Second Amendment: America's original homeland security. Ya just can’t take life too seriously, because you aren’t going to get out of it alive anyway. |
|
| Author: | a10stress [ 03 Apr 2006, 08:46 ] |
| Post subject: | |
|
|
|
| Author: | MICHAEL PIJAR [ 03 Apr 2006, 08:47 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fox news web site has a 5 minute clip about the crash. "GLAD TO HAVE BEEN THERE AND HAVE BEEN PROUD TO HAVE SERVERED" |
|
| Author: | Weasel_80-204 [ 03 Apr 2006, 08:50 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm sure Goob has a nice spot for it now. You might be a "Bulldog" if: You bend over and grab your ankles when you hear: "EXERCISE, EXERCISE, EXERCISE!" |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 03 Apr 2006, 10:27 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yikes, not a lot of thrust margin on FRED if you loose one engine and are loaded up! Hard to tell how much she was haulin. A 45 has a muzzle. A 9mm has a bullet vent. |
|
| Author: | fenderstrat72 [ 03 Apr 2006, 13:37 ] |
| Post subject: | |
The good news is there were no casulties. Fender "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." George Bernard Shaw |
|
| Author: | ProfessorFinkle [ 03 Apr 2006, 20:20 ] |
| Post subject: | |
it just had a #2 engine flame out its still good its still good!<img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle> Just a little broken its still good, its still good! <img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle> “Why Why Why was I programmed to feel pain!?” |
|
| Author: | Dutchy [ 04 Apr 2006, 00:45 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here are some photo's from CNN http://www.cnn.com/interactive/us/0604/ ... clude.html And here from af.mil http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123018520 Unbelievble that almost everybody is unhurt. That's good. Salute Dutchy ------------------------ Termites do it in the dark! (47FS Barksdale afb) |
|
| Author: | Ice Pirate [ 04 Apr 2006, 09:32 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Some really lucky boys on that bird. From the pics I've seen, it looks like they over shot the runway on their landing. Thank God all of them made it out alive. Last time one of these crashed, it took 13 of the crew with it. "Slow is Fast - Fast is Slow" |
|
| Author: | ProfessorFinkle [ 04 Apr 2006, 12:16 ] |
| Post subject: | |
the reason it caused no deaths or injuries, was due to the planes size! -=-=-=-= “Why Why Why was I programmed to feel pain!?” |
|
| Author: | M21 Sniper [ 04 Apr 2006, 13:20 ] |
| Post subject: | |
US Automotive crashtests clearly show that a vehicle with a greater mass results in less injuries to the occupants for any given speed. I assume that's what he's referring to. Since there was no fire in this instance, he's probably on to something...maybe. LOL. <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> |
|
| Author: | Old Chief [ 04 Apr 2006, 14:17 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'll go with intact fuel cells = no fire = survivability. Thinking mass has little to do with it. OC Some days it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints |
|
| Author: | fenderstrat72 [ 04 Apr 2006, 19:24 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>the reason it caused no deaths or injuries, was due to the planes size! <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> ???????????? Fender "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." George Bernard Shaw |
|
| Author: | prkiii [ 04 Apr 2006, 20:21 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> the reason it caused no deaths or injuries, was due to the planes size! -=-=-=-= “Why Why Why was I programmed to feel pain!?” <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> Uhm...do you know anything about ACFT? I'm thinking not.... <img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/70th.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/Mav_shot.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/25.jpg" border=0> |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 04 Apr 2006, 22:00 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm thinkin <u>HE</u> thinks C-5 is so big it creats it's own gravitational field and thus cushions it's occupants in an impact. Either that or he's all funky-doodle, I'm betting on the funky-doodle part <img src=newicons/anim_lol.gif border=0 align=middle> A 45 has a muzzle. A 9mm has a bullet vent. |
|
| Author: | M21 Sniper [ 05 Apr 2006, 18:30 ] |
| Post subject: | |
" I'll go with intact fuel cells = no fire = survivability. Thinking mass has little to do with it." I'm no physicist, but that is apperently a truism(more mass=less injuries) with automobles. Hence SUVs being safer in crashes(unless they roll, which is an unrelated issue) There is a lot of NHTSA data about the subject on the net if anyone wants to spend the time to look into it. Here's a snippet: http://www.piercelaw.edu/Risk/Vol3/spring/Graham.htm "One of the reasons for this reversal was growing recognition of the findings of the first peer-reviewed study of CAFE and safety, which estimated that 1989 models are 500 pounds lighter than they would have been without CAFE rules, resulting in a 14 to 27% elevation in the occupant fatality rate in these vehicles." <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> |
|
| Author: | sgtgoose1 [ 05 Apr 2006, 19:58 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Old "FRED" might have its draw backs keeping her in the air, but just by seeing the Cargo that is there when "He" hit that might of just saved the aircraft breaking FRED at that Joint. FRED is a Tough SOB Plus on take-off if they still have those rules the LoadMasters are up stairs out of the Cargo area the PAX are on the same level as the Flt Crew so everyone was away from the area of breakage. That FLT Crew did an "OUTSTANDING JOB" bringing him in and I think we'll find out that the crew put her down there in case it did "Crash and Burn" because Dover is a "MAJOR" staging point. No matter what "A crash you can walk away from is a "GOOD FLIGHT" Goose They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin, (1706 - 1790) |
|
| Author: | M21 Sniper [ 05 Apr 2006, 21:30 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well said Goose. <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> |
|
| Author: | prkiii [ 06 Apr 2006, 10:37 ] |
| Post subject: | |
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> " I'll go with intact fuel cells = no fire = survivability. Thinking mass has little to do with it." I'm no physicist, but that is apperently a truism(more mass=less injuries) with automobles. Hence SUVs being safer in crashes(unless they roll, which is an unrelated issue) There is a lot of NHTSA data about the subject on the net if anyone wants to spend the time to look into it. Here's a snippet: http://www.piercelaw.edu/Risk/Vol3/spring/Graham.htm "One of the reasons for this reversal was growing recognition of the findings of the first peer-reviewed study of CAFE and safety, which estimated that 1989 models are 500 pounds lighter than they would have been without CAFE rules, resulting in a 14 to 27% elevation in the occupant fatality rate in these vehicles." <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> Snipe...you know I respect your opinion, but compairing an automobile crash to an aicraft crash is like apples and oranges.... <img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/70th.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/Mav_shot.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/25.jpg" border=0> |
|
| Author: | M21 Sniper [ 06 Apr 2006, 11:38 ] |
| Post subject: | |
I am not trying to marry the CAFE/NHTSA data to airplane crashes, im just pointing out that there is SOME data to suggest that Finkle wasnt as nuts as many first thought. I have no idea if it applies to planes as it does to motor vehicles. In all honesty the idea to me seems kind of counter-intuitive. At a like velocity a heavier object will release more KE at impact than a lighter one. <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> |
|
| Author: | boomer [ 06 Apr 2006, 20:15 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Maybe something like this, a heavier object would loose it's KE at a more gradual rate, thereby producing lesser G loads on ( in this case ) the occupants. A 45 has a muzzle. A 9mm has a bullet vent. |
|
| Author: | M21 Sniper [ 06 Apr 2006, 20:39 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Possibly. Another possibility is that a heavier object tends to be a more sturdily constructed object. I really don't know, i've never really read up on the phenomenon. Of course as Prkiii pointed out it could in reality be totally irrelevant to aircraft. <img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0> <b>"One post, One Kill".</b> |
|
| Author: | prkiii [ 07 Apr 2006, 09:07 ] |
| Post subject: | |
The main reason I feel it wouldn't be the same is you not only have the force of the impact, but you have gravity pulling down on the aircraft as well as it's forward inertia...... <img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/70th.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/Mav_shot.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/25.jpg" border=0> |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|