C-5 Galaxy Crash

Bort · 04-03-06, 01:27 PM

Boy, what a huge mess...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4872720.stm
Thankfully no deaths. Looks from the way it came apart like structural failure.

Kapitan · 04-03-06, 01:30 PM

Another one ?

STEED · 04-03-06, 01:42 PM

Heck

JetSnake · 04-03-06, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *[FOX

* Bort]Boy, what a huge mess...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4872720.stm
Thankfully no deaths. Looks from the way it came apart like structural failure.

The structures tend to fail when they make hard landings or crash. It didn't fail during flight my friend. Now maybe an engine or two did (fail))and they weren't able to keep it airborne.

Bort · 04-03-06, 01:45 PM

Where'd the tail go? Thats my hypothesis on structural failure.

Kapitan · 04-03-06, 01:46 PM

One engine yes but its still able to keep in the air.

And yes aircraft structures do fail in air plenty of examples 747 from honalulu to sydney part of the plane failed a boeing 737 top front area ripped right off.

Watch air crash investigation its real life and it is a good programme too.

JetSnake · 04-03-06, 01:59 PM

I understand structures fail in the air and the airplane can fly, but tails falling off and the airplane still flying are unpossible, well flying under any control that is. And obviously this aircraft was in a controlled landing by the looks of it, it just broke apart at different places during its roll out. You can see where the airplane appears to have swung it nose to the right approximately 90 degrees from its landing path. Look at the upper left you can see debris.

Kapitan · 04-03-06, 02:19 PM

How far from the airport was it and also when it failed it had to have been airborne.

90 degrees from the airport it would have been on the base leg ie about 3,000 feet 12 miles from the airport so when it failed again airborne.

Unless your telling me it ran off the runway?

Oberon · 04-03-06, 02:22 PM

Does look a lot like a problem with the tail.
The nose and cockpit angle was definately created on impact.

Bit of a mess though, thank goodness no-one was hurt.

XabbaRus · 04-03-06, 03:54 PM

OK happened on take-off.
Helps if you read the read the article guys...

Bort · 04-03-06, 08:54 PM

This Navy Times article has more info: http://www.navytimes.com/story.php?f...25-1661761.php

bradclark1 · 04-03-06, 09:42 PM

I think it says a lot for the plane to come out of it like it did.

Bort · 04-03-06, 11:14 PM

This report has more details about the plane involved, a recently upgraded C-5B.http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/p.../NEWS/60403017
Also, three Lockheed employees were on board. :hmm:

MadMike · 04-03-06, 11:31 PM

I was at Ramstein during Flugtag '88 and the C-5 crash two years later.
Cause of the Ramstein C-5 crash was thrust reversal activation (or so that's what was printed in Stars and Stripes (European edition of Pravda). Heard engine run up for takeoff followed by a very loud boom and the subsequent crash around 1:30 a.m (sounded like a few dozen garbage bins being thrown down the street). Don't even want to go into details about Flugtag

Otherwise the C-5 has a pretty good safety record.

Yours, Mike

Kapitan · 04-04-06, 01:29 AM

What was the plane that was involved in that baby lift was it the C5?

It crashed not long after take off and killed most / all on board.

04-03-06, 01:27 PM	#1
Bort Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Studying in Atlanta Posts: 919 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	C-5 Galaxy Crash Boy, what a huge mess... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4872720.stm Thankfully no deaths. Looks from the way it came apart like structural failure. __________________ GT Aerospace

04-03-06, 01:30 PM	#2
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	Another one ? __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

04-03-06, 01:42 PM	#3
STEED Lucky Jack Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Down Town UK Posts: 27,695 Downloads: 89 Uploads: 48	Heck __________________ Dr Who rest in peace 1963-2017. To borrow Davros saying...I NAME YOU CHIBNALL THE DESTROYER OF DR WHO YOU KILLED IT!

04-03-06, 01:45 PM	#5
Bort Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Studying in Atlanta Posts: 919 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	Where'd the tail go? Thats my hypothesis on structural failure. __________________ GT Aerospace

04-03-06, 01:46 PM	#6
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	One engine yes but its still able to keep in the air. And yes aircraft structures do fail in air plenty of examples 747 from honalulu to sydney part of the plane failed a boeing 737 top front area ripped right off. Watch air crash investigation its real life and it is a good programme too. __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

04-03-06, 01:59 PM	#7
JetSnake Navy Dude Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 176 Downloads: 12 Uploads: 0	I understand structures fail in the air and the airplane can fly, but tails falling off and the airplane still flying are unpossible, well flying under any control that is. And obviously this aircraft was in a controlled landing by the looks of it, it just broke apart at different places during its roll out. You can see where the airplane appears to have swung it nose to the right approximately 90 degrees from its landing path. Look at the upper left you can see debris.

04-03-06, 02:19 PM	#8
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	How far from the airport was it and also when it failed it had to have been airborne. 90 degrees from the airport it would have been on the base leg ie about 3,000 feet 12 miles from the airport so when it failed again airborne. Unless your telling me it ran off the runway? __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

04-03-06, 02:22 PM	#9
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Does look a lot like a problem with the tail. The nose and cockpit angle was definately created on impact. Bit of a mess though, thank goodness no-one was hurt.

04-03-06, 03:54 PM	#10
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	OK happened on take-off. Helps if you read the read the article guys... __________________

04-03-06, 08:54 PM	#11
Bort Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Studying in Atlanta Posts: 919 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	This Navy Times article has more info: http://www.navytimes.com/story.php?f...25-1661761.php __________________ GT Aerospace

04-03-06, 09:42 PM	#12
bradclark1 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Connecticut, USA. Posts: 2,794 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	I think it says a lot for the plane to come out of it like it did.

04-03-06, 11:14 PM	#13
Bort Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Studying in Atlanta Posts: 919 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	This report has more details about the plane involved, a recently upgraded C-5B.http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/p.../NEWS/60403017 Also, three Lockheed employees were on board. :hmm: __________________ GT Aerospace

04-03-06, 11:31 PM	#14
MadMike Watch Officer Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 342 Downloads: 241 Uploads: 0	I was at Ramstein during Flugtag '88 and the C-5 crash two years later. Cause of the Ramstein C-5 crash was thrust reversal activation (or so that's what was printed in Stars and Stripes (European edition of Pravda). Heard engine run up for takeoff followed by a very loud boom and the subsequent crash around 1:30 a.m (sounded like a few dozen garbage bins being thrown down the street). Don't even want to go into details about Flugtag Otherwise the C-5 has a pretty good safety record. Yours, Mike

04-04-06, 01:29 AM	#15
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	What was the plane that was involved in that baby lift was it the C5? It crashed not long after take off and killed most / all on board. __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/