Lighter Note: Canoe.ca Finds C-17 Sexy!

[aesop081]

maybe talk to some actual pilots.

Why ?

All you are going to get out of them is "Look at me i'm so awesome" or words to that effect

;D

 

[Hunteroffortune]

Why ?

All you are going to get out of them is "Look at me i'm so awesome" or words to that effect

;D

Well, last time we went to an airshow, all the military people were "awesome". It's the planes that are awesome, but the pilots who fly them probably are too. 

Last year I took my boys to Klondike Days/Capital Ex, the most fun they had was at the military pavillion. They got to pick up real guns, see some real tanks, and talk to real troops who had been to Afghanistan. After that they started asking about joining the cadets, which I have encouraged, I much prefer them being in the  cadets to them hanging around the malls.

 

[retiredgrunt45]

If I was a pilot, I'd drive her!! She is somewhat hot; actually, quite sizzling. 

You vixen you.  ;D

 

[Brockvegas]

Are you turning this into a plane porn thread??  ;D

C'mon Vern, some of us like the "bigger" girls. I mean really, look at those curves! How can you not love it?  ;D

 

[Inch]

For reference, a Halifax-Class frigate is 4,470 Tones.....

The article implies that the C-17 can carry 11 halifax-Class frigates


Not bad for a 200-ton airlifter

Not trying to pick fly shit out of pepper, but the navy website lists the CPFs as 4,770 tonnes and 77,000/4,770 is more like 16 CPFs.

Too funny though, I sent an email off to CTV yesterday noting that there was no way that a single airplane could carry 16 Halifax class patrol frigates and that their numbers were a bit off. Low and behold, today the article has changed, with of course no reply to my email.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070829/c17_afghanistan_070829/20070830/

 

[404SqnAVSTeach]

Are you turning this into a plane porn thread??  ;D

;D ;D ;D

No, I'd post these instead 

 

[Globesmasher]

C'mon Vern, some of us like the "bigger" girls. I mean really, look at those curves! How can you not love it?  ;D

This will be about the only time when I say "Short and fat is sexy".
We were thinking of putting that on the Sqn patch .................

 

[Hunteroffortune]

This is a great sexample of how the media distorts the truth. They are so lazy they can't even research an article. Funny how they have finally corrected their mistakes. To bad that the average Canadian doesn't see the changes, only the original article.

Still that plane is sexy. Bet there is a line up to fly it! I loved the fact that it's first mission was to fly supplies to people hit by the hurricane. Maybe next time PM Harper goes to Afghanistan he will fly in the C-17, it would be safer than some of those old planes.

 

[inferno]

2 Questions:

The photo with the C17 taking off, what's with the tail number being painted over?
It's in light grey 177701 in all the other pictures, and in real life, but in that picture it's 500something or other?

Point 2. It is setup for airtoair refueling from a boom style refueler?
I was under the impression the only A2A refueling we are setup for was with a hose/reel/drogue style setup. Are we going to be using allied refueling aircraft? I bet $1.04 a L for regular looks dirt cheap compared to buying fuel from the back of a KC-10 or KC-135.

 

[medaid]

I bet $1.04 a L for regular looks dirt cheap compared to buying fuel from the back of a KC-10 or KC-135.

"Ugh, Air Force 39D this is 701"
"701"
"AF 39D do you take cash?"
"ugh, 701 uh, negative, we'll take anything from VISA, Master Card or paypal"
"AF 39D, copy. Will be Paypaling funds. Cheers for the fuel"

 

[Bandit1]

I wish Edmonton still had the air show, we loved going, and my boys would love to see some of those planes up close, maybe talk to some actual pilots.

For a chance to talk to some of the pilots and a heck of a lot of people involved in the air show world, head over to http://www.airshowbuzz.com and poke around.  You'll find videos, message boards, and a whole bunch of nice photos from air shows all over North America.

Cheers, Bandit

 

[rz350]

woah! the C-17 can carry a Panamax cargo ship with a bit of room to spare?

beautiful bird tho.

 

[Globesmasher]

2 Questions:

The photo with the C17 taking off, what's with the tail number being painted over?
It's in light grey 177701 in all the other pictures, and in real life, but in that picture it's 500something or other?

Discussion and answers found here:...............
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/64555.0.html

Point 2. It is setup for airtoair refueling from a boom style refueler?
I was under the impression the only A2A refueling we are setup for was with a hose/reel/drogue style setup. Are we going to be using allied refueling aircraft? I bet $1.04 a L for regular looks dirt cheap compared to buying fuel from the back of a KC-10 or KC-135.

Full discussions on Air Refuelling, among other things, found here: ...........
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/54089.0.html

Enjoy.

 

[C1302C17 TECH]

LOL, that is too funny, and with all new C-17's being built for ER (extended range) that would be just shy of 150,000 lbs of fuel, or if you do the math...

250,000lbs of fuel divided by 1.78 (a common number for finding fuel weight based upon a specific gravity of .8

equals... about 140,449 litres of fuel...  Feel free to correct the math as it's been about 10 weeks since I have been on the line and my mind is numb with C-17 technical data.

Cheers

 

[inferno]

USAF pays about $17.50 per gallon of fuel delivered in-flight... or at least that's what one report I've read stated.

$17.50x140,499... that can't be right.

~$2, 500, 000 worth of in flight fueling?

 

[Nfld Sapper]

USAF pays about $17.50 per gallon of fuel delivered in-flight... or at least that's what one report I've read stated.

$17.50x140,499... that can't be right.

~$2, 500, 000 worth of in flight fueling?

Yeah you wrong I think

Remember  1 gal= 4 liters  so.....

17.50 *35124.75 = $614,683.13

If my math is right.

 

[Globesmasher]

Typically during AR, the fuel that comes down the boom at you costs 9 times more than it costs to pump it straight out of the ground.