C-17 production to be ended
Author
Discussion

Silent1

Original Poster:

19,761 posts

256 months

Monday 1st February 2010
quotequote all
According to Fox news the president has decided the c-17 isn't worth it's cost (2.something billion) so they're proposing to can it

Mojocvh

16,837 posts

283 months

Monday 1st February 2010
quotequote all
Silent1 said:
According to Fox news the president has decided the c-17 isn't worth it's cost (2.something billion) so they're proposing to can it
Muhahahahahahahahahah

Eric Mc

124,494 posts

286 months

Monday 1st February 2010
quotequote all
How long has the line been open - 20 years?

Silent1

Original Poster:

19,761 posts

256 months

Monday 1st February 2010
quotequote all
Introduced to the USAF in 1993 but developed in the late 80s

Shar2

2,251 posts

234 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
Blooming good transporter though. Shame we can't buy any more, especially as the 400M seems on the brink of collapse.

anonymous-user

75 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
Production is continuing until at least 2013 for 223 aircraft for the USAF, up from the original planned 180. Combined with the C-5 (which still has another 30 years of service left) they simply don't need any more.

As for the A400M, unfortunately I expect continuing delays and performance problems ( if it even enters service) will lead to even more A400M cancelations and C-17 orders from other countries.



Edited by el stovey on Tuesday 2nd February 08:24

skyslimit

524 posts

193 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
I see the C-17 in the air on an almost daily basis, it's a lovely big beast when your in the air beside it, visible from miles away.

Always good to hear the 'Reach' callsign in a broad Southern drawl as the lads go into Rota as well.

anonymous-user

75 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
skyslimit said:
I see the C-17 in the air on an almost daily basis, it's a lovely big beast when your in the air beside it, visible from miles away.

Always good to hear the 'Reach' callsign in a broad Southern drawl as the lads go into Rota as well.
Unsurprisingly, you hear "reach" all over the place at the moment.

C-5s and C-17s USAF transport flights and even civilian contracted flights. People like Evergreen international and various other civilian charter airlines use "reach" also.

tuffer

8,942 posts

288 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
What does "Reach" mean?

Eric Mc

124,494 posts

286 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
It's just a Callsign.

The USAF used to use the word MAC for their transport aircarft callsign (when the USAF unit was called Military Airlift Command).

anonymous-user

75 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
tuffer said:
What does "Reach" mean?
It's a call sign used by The USAF Air Mobility Command and other civilian contractors doing similar work.

The phrase comes from 'Global Reach'. Which was a motto of the USAF Air Mobility Command.

'America's global reach' & 'Gobal reach, global power'. etc etc







They love it. hehe

Edited by el stovey on Tuesday 2nd February 11:14

Magog

2,653 posts

210 months

Tuesday 2nd February 2010
quotequote all
If the A400M gets cancelled, which seems a real possibility, am I right in thinking this would leave 'the west' without a large military transport in production? Is the IL-76 production line still open? If not then presumably none of thest types of aircraft will be made in the world. Seems a little short sighted to my eyes. Presumably this news increases the chances of the A400M reaching production.

motomk

2,179 posts

265 months

Wednesday 3rd February 2010
quotequote all
Read somewhere again recently that the Ruslan An124 is going back into production. The Russian air-force need some more.

Trek is another callsign I have heard for the C17 and of course Stallion and Aussie!!!;)

thatone1967

4,214 posts

212 months

Sunday 7th February 2010
quotequote all
Silent1 said:
According to Fox news the president has decided the c-17 isn't worth it's cost (2.something billion) so they're proposing to can it
to be fair, that was for 15 aircraft, and not per unit...