# C-5 Galaxy Visit



## WingsofFury (15 Feb 2011)

A neat visitor to CFB Trenton today - a C-5 Galaxy from Dover AFB made about 5 touch and goes in the circuit today.  I think it would be cool to see a CF rondel on this plane one day.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (15 Feb 2011)

Why would the CF buy an aircraft that is 30 years old?


----------



## brihard (15 Feb 2011)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Why would the CF buy an aircraft that is 30 years old?



So it could fit in with its peers.  ;D


----------



## WingsofFury (15 Feb 2011)

I know it's old - but with the upgrades (now at M series) it's really fulfilling the role well for the USAF.

Brihard - funny, maybe, but I think that longevity of use is a good thing, showing how well techs and crews look after the birds we have in the air.


----------



## brihard (15 Feb 2011)

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> I know it's old - but with the upgrades (now at M series) it's really fulfilling the role well for the USAF.
> 
> Brihard - funny, maybe, but I think that longevity of use is a good thing, showing how well techs and crews look after the birds we have in the air.



Joking aside- opportunity cost.

CF funding is finite. Air force funding is finite. What critical niche role would this aircraft fill so well that it would justify the expense? What alternative capability would we have to give up in exchange for it?


----------



## WingsofFury (15 Feb 2011)

I think it would be an easy sell as a dedicated DART aircraft.

My first choice, if we had the funds available, would be to purchase another 4 C-17's though.


----------



## Rheostatic (15 Feb 2011)

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> I think it would be an easy sell as a dedicated DART aircraft.


Does DART deploy often enough for that to be even remotely economical? And why do you think our current transport aircraft are inadequate for that duty?

Nice photos.


----------



## WingsofFury (15 Feb 2011)

Rheostatic said:
			
		

> Does DART deploy often enough for that to be even remotely economical? And why do you think our current transport aircraft are inadequate for that duty?
> 
> Nice photos.



Probably not, but the fact that our 4 C-17's are always in use may at some point prevent them from performing the task.  Hence my belief that more of what we currently have would be a far better option.  :nod: 

In no way, shape, or form am I suggesting that our current transport aircraft are inadequate for that duty - not in the least.

Glad you like the photos.


----------



## Infanteer (16 Feb 2011)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Why would the CF buy an aircraft that is 30 years old?



Like the 40 year old helicopters we just bought?


----------



## captloadie (16 Feb 2011)

Before 9/11, C-5s did touch and goes in Trenton on almost a weekly basis during the summer. The screaming coming from the engine as they took off again actually hurt the ears, even in a car at the Zellers. I'd hate to have to work on the flight line with them there day in and day out.


----------



## WingsofFury (16 Feb 2011)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Before 9/11, C-5s did touch and goes in Trenton on almost a weekly basis during the summer. The screaming coming from the engine as they took off again actually hurt the ears, even in a car at the Zellers. I'd hate to have to work on the flight line with them there day in and day out.



I hear you on that - when it flew over me the high pitched whine was intense.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (16 Feb 2011)

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> I think it would be an easy sell as a dedicated DART aircraft.





			
				Rheostatic said:
			
		

> Does DART deploy often enough for that to be even remotely economical? And why do you think our current transport aircraft are inadequate for that duty?



No they don't...... and afaik the C-130/C-17/Rentals are enough for DART IMHO......


----------



## ArmyRick (16 Feb 2011)

I don't see any need to spend a dime on C-5s. We have more pressing defence procurements that could better use the money.


----------



## NavyShooter (17 Feb 2011)

After we get new APC's/LAV's/CCV, new light helos, new Frigates, take delivery of our MHPS, maybe buy some new pistols to replace the Brownings, maybe then we should think about adding a few more C-17's to give us some breathing room on the demand for them.  

NS


----------



## aesop081 (17 Feb 2011)

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> I know it's old - but with the upgrades (now at M series) it's really fulfilling the role well for the USAF.



Rather irrelevant since no one builds new C-5s.


----------



## WingsofFury (18 Feb 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Rather irrelevant since no one builds new C-5s.



This might pose a problem.... ;D

Wouldn't it be great to be able to have everything and then the sugar on top too?? lol


----------

