It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

C-17

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Not that far back, the YC-15 first flew in 1975 and the YC-14 in 1976, they were intended as replacements for the C-130 and developed through the AMST programme which stood for Advanced Medium Stol Transport. This programme (and hence both designs) was canned in 1978 when it was decided that upgrading the C-130 was more cost effective. The C-17 is directly decended from the YC-15.
There was a study back in 1963 to find a Hercules replacement but this called for a VTOL transpot along similar lines to the British HS.681. This was never pursued however and in any case the British bought C-130's when the HS.681 was cancelled in 1965.




posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   
No idea, might have been something with the engines...




[edit on 19-6-2005 by Figher Master FIN]



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Lovely pic but I don't understand what it is you have 'no idea' about?



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   
What happend during the landing...



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
The YC-14 didn't fly until the 70s, but it was designed in the 60s. The began the design work, then when the C-130 replacement program came along trotted it out and entered it.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Figher Master FIN
What happend during the landing...


Its landing on a an unimproved runway so you get alot of dust etc kicked up. The key is that its all behind the plane to cut down of FOD etc. When we fly over a dirt field in the chopter even several hundred feet high it kicks up alot of derbits hence the term "dust off"



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 07:37 PM
link   
There was actually a project in the works for a few years to produce and market the MD-17 which would be a dumbed down civilian version of the C-17 but it never went anywhere. Too bad, it would have been perfect for transporting the 777 engine, since there's not much out there that can transport one, outside of Military aircraft.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 03:50 AM
link   
C-17 rules! Thank god they fly by my house all the time, being as McCord AFB is 10 miles from my house. (Along with Fort Lewis and it's Chinooks)



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 05:36 AM
link   
Okay, I have an affection for the 17 because it is something I have been modelling for a while now for my video projects. Although I am not a hardcore aviation enthusiast, I still get a woody for airplanes, and one of my central props for one of my projects is the C17. I designed the script around a modern cargo plane and to my amusement is currently the 17. I have tons of pics of it for reference and find the design way more advanced than its predecesors. It is a very purposeful design for what it is supposed to do.

Not to link a website, but here is a pic of my 80% complete render of the plane at my website.

3D pic of C-17

The model you see is kind of small, but the file I have for it is almost complete since I posted that pic. It has over 30 moveable surfaces, that can be animated into a video if I need be. Unfortanetly the project hasn't got off the ground because of lack of finding a production crew, so the computer models sit in the dust only to be shown to the casual people who it would interest.

Hope you like it.

[edit on 20-6-2005 by ben91069]




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join