C-17 Globemaster Pregame Flyover

[Enki_Amenra]

700 mph? I would really like to see a cargo plane flying at close to the speed of sound lol. I'm far too lazy to do the calculation, but at that height (and therefore temp), 730 mph seems like a good estimate.

the max speed is 590mph. Not bad for a plane that size. Wonder what it's MPG is?

 

[stolitonic]

the max speed is 590mph. Not bad for a plane that size. Wonder what it's MPG is?

Dunno, but I would wager it burns more to taxi out to the runway than you or I put into our vehicles in a year.

A 747 uses basically a gallon a second-at altitude

 

[Alto1]

That’s one big bad bird!!
God Bless America!

 

[CPA]

Thanks so much for sharing, couldn't see from my seats in D.

 

[Enki_Amenra]

Thanks so much for sharing, couldn't see from my seats in D.

I'll try to post them every time. They seem to always fly the same route over the top of my house 5-10 times for 2-3 days before the game.

The fighter jets last year were awesome. Wish I recorded their final pass, you could see the flames coming out of the exhaust. Pretty cool.

The c-17 was insanely low the day before the game, the first time I saw it flyover. Much lower than in the video. Looked like you could throw a stone and hit it. No joke, I would say around 1,500ft., but looked lower. Pretty strange to see a military craft (or any craft) so slow, especially if you don't realize what they're doing.

 

[Enki_Amenra]

Dunno, but I would wager it burns more to taxi out to the runway than you or I put into our vehicles in a year.

A 747 uses basically a gallon a second-at altitude

Sounds about like an old car I used to have,

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

That seems pretty slow, given their scale. I suppose they don't top out much faster, maybe 500-700mph? 200ish mph seems like crawling to me. Seems crazy a plane of that size can stay in the air moving that slow. . . I'm not Josh Dobbs, so it's probably just my ignorance that makes it seems wild.

You hit it…. It just looks like they are slow due to their size.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

the max speed is 590mph. Not bad for a plane that size. Wonder what it's MPG is?

I fly the A350 which is the state of the art airliner at the moment. Our cruising speed is M.85 which is pretty fast.. about 8.5 miles/minute. (No wind-nautical miles). About 585 statute mph. when we are down at 450,000 lbs we are burning about 12,000 lbs/hour which comes out to about a half gallon/second. All that just illustrates just how far engine technology has come in the last few years. A 747 by comparison is an Abrams tank and I’m driving a brand new Porsche. (Probably a better comparison to be had though).

so if you were wondering…. Our gallons per mile is about 3.5.

oh…. And I don’t know, but I would be pretty surprised if a C17 can go that fast. I’ll ask around. I’m sure we have a few of those pilots around.

 

[Enki_Amenra]

I fly the A350 which is the state of the art airliner at the moment. Our cruising speed is M.85 which is pretty fast.. about 8.5 miles/minute. (No wind-nautical miles). About 585 statute mph. when we are down at 450,000 lbs we are burning about 12,000 lbs/hour which comes out to about a half gallon/second. All that just illustrates just how far engine technology has come in the last few years. A 747 by comparison is an Abrams tank and I’m driving a brand new Porsche. (Probably a better comparison to be had though).

so if you were wondering…. Our gallons per mile is about 3.5.

oh…. And I don’t know, but I would be pretty surprised if a C17 can go that fast. I’ll ask around. I’m sure we have a few of those pilots around.

I read the 590mph in the internet. May be right may not. . . either way, that was max speed, so I imagine they would rarely try to ever reach that speed. That gpm isn't bad, considering how many people/weight it can carry at that rate.

A350, is that an airbus?

 

[Volador]

It IS classified as a heavy lift aircraft. In a pinch it can can haul an M-1 main battle tank. It is designed to operate from remote landing strips (but usually doesn't) and its thrust reversers can actually move it backwards!

The C-17 came about because the Air Force wanted an a heavy lifter to supplement the C-5 without re-opening the C-5 production line. The C-5 is a 1960s design and the newest one is over 30 years old. It has been upgraded to the C-5M standard but is still an old design.

The USAF has approximately three times as many C-17s as C-5s.

The -17 we saw Saturday came by at pretty much the same speed it would use when dropping paratroopers (one of its missions).

It cruises at 520 knots which puts it up there with most commercial airliners.

Paratroopers. That's it!! We need 100 paratroopers dropped onto Shields Watkins Field during this weeks game vs the Cocks. Who do we call to arrange this??

 

[orange parmejohn]

I got to work on one of these when I was in the Air Force. Beautiful planes. Seeing one flyover Neyland will be an absolute treat for those in attendance.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I read the 590mph in the internet. May be right may not. . . either way, that was max speed, so I imagine they would rarely try to ever reach that speed. That gpm isn't bad, considering how many people/weight it can carry at that rate.

A350, is that an airbus?

Yes. Airbus. I just looked on my phone and I don't have any good pictures. I'll post a couple when I get home later

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

 

[FLVOL_79]

the max speed is 590mph. Not bad for a plane that size. Wonder what it's MPG is?

It can also land on a shorter runway than a C-130.

Pretty sure that isnt classified.

 

[FLVOL_79]

View attachment 582159

First time I got in a C-17 I thought "this looks so futuristic". That was 20+ years ago though..

 

[Enki_Amenra]

View attachment 582157

I'd like to strap one of those engines onto my f150,

 

[Enki_Amenra]

View attachment 582159

Idk what's more impressive; the fact that a cockpit like that was ever engineered or the fact pilots know how to use everything on there.

 

[camp_steveo]

I was a kid in Germany in the 1980s. My step dad was in the Army. I was standing at the kitchen sink of our 3rd floor apt when a jet flew by without making a sound. I thought, that was weird. A second or two later it rattled the windows....LOL

 

[Woodlawn VOL]

a guy who knows the cost involved

Washington blows money on worse things than that. GBO

 

[kunsanvol]

This post has the "Hey, look at me everybody! I was part of a flight crew in the military so I'm gonna' make a ridiculous comment on a message board so I get attention" vibe to it. Every aviation unit in the National Guard and Reserves have AFTP's (Additional Flight Training Periods). At least that's what they were called on the Army side. It may be called something different in the Air Force, but it's essentially the same. You get paid extra money to come in and fly to maintain your readiness. It doesn't matter that it was for a fly over at a UT game. The point is, the maintainers had to come in and make sure the maintenance was completed on the aircraft. The flight crew had to come in and ensure their flight equipment was good to go, make a flight plan, file that flight plan, brief the mission, preflight the airframe, and then go execute that mission on time and on target. It just so happened that the time and target was Neyland Stadium at the conclusion of The National Anthem to showcase the awesomeness of our brothers and sisters in uniform. But hey, you do you fella.

You have no idea what you're talking about, fella.

 

[kunsanvol]

Right. It was, at least, a 2 day training exercise. Maybe 3 or 4 days or more.

lmao no it was not

 

[Plecoptera]

The C-17 is a neat aircraft. I used to see them dropping paratroopers a couple times a year. I’ve watched both C-17s and C-5s coming in and out of Warner Robins AFB. The C-5 looks like it’s barely moving due to the massive size.

 

[PalmettoStateVol]

You have no idea what you're talking about, fella.

Sure....I guess you could say the over 2500 hours that I logged throughout a 20 year career in military aviation (yes, sometimes even doing flyover's at games) didn't really count because it disagrees with the absolutely ridiculous take you have on this subject. It is quite possible that my previous experience as a NRCM Flight Instructor and ALSE tech means I'm not qualified to understand how all of the training hours I had to coordinate and then execute worked. We should've just given the funding back and refused to do anything even remotely close to something the public could possibly get enjoyment from. I mean, why would we possibly do that? Static Displays and Flyover's.....NOT ON MY WATCH!!!!! It's not like the tax money that came out of their pocket paid my salary, right? Or maybe it was the multiple Air Medals and Sikorski Rescue awards for MEDEVAC hoist rescues in places like Afghanistan that disqualifies me from knowing and fully comprehending how the military setup their training programs. No wait, I've got it, it was the multiple public service missions like going to Louisiana during Hurricane Katrina that has me absolutely blinded as to how the process really played out. Yeah, you're probably right. All of those mundane and basic tasks that we had to constantly perform until it was second nature were a complete waste of time and resources.

You have absolutely bested me, sir. My DD-214 and DA form 759 are 100% lies. It is obvious that I have no clue what I'm talking about......

 

[VOLINVONORE]

GIANT waste of taxpayer money.

Giant misunderstanding of what it takes to protect our Nation. They have to do training missions anyway, why not show off what we have, especially when it is older vintage aircraft.