Beyond The Sprues
Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Aero-space => Topic started by: GTX_Admin on April 03, 2013, 02:55:37 PM
-
I thought the C-141s had fatigue issues.
-
If you have that recollection, it is likely so.
Without 1/72 styrene C-141 available,,, my bringing it up is irrelevent anyway - oops :-[
-
I may be wrong...
-
If you have that recollection, it is likely so.
Without 1/72 styrene C-141 available,,, my bringing it up is irrelevent anyway - oops :-[
Combat Models do the A and B in styrene Bill, --- that's vacuform styrene ;D They also do a fairly good resin detail sets for most of their vacuforms.
Got one of each in the stash --- As an aside, I found that the C-141A fuselage just happens to be about the same size to a C-135. I've been thinking of a high winged C-135 as a Boeing competitor using the engine nacelles from the 141
-
Yes. Fatigue issues in the 141's; have read that multiple places prior to the advent of the general availability of this here interwebs.
Nice firebomber!
-
Got one of each in the stash --- As an aside, I found that the C-141A fuselage just happens to be about the same size to a C-135. I've been thinking of a high winged C-135 as a Boeing competitor using the engine nacelles from the 141
Of course, that also suggests the possibility of a KC-141.
Just a thought, a CILOP'd or new-build C-141C with CFM56 engines and the addition of a refueling probe in addtion to the flying boom receptacle.
-
The above posts were split off from the A-10 thread. Now continue on your way...
-
Pesudo-bomber equipped with improved avionics and armed with MOAB in its cargo hold?
-
How about some non-USA operators?
-
Pesudo-bomber equipped with improved avionics and armed with MOAB in its cargo hold?
Thinking that would be next gen MOAB built without B-52 bomb bay size constraints. KaaBooom !
-
Thinking that would be next gen MOAB built without B-52 bomb bay size constraints. KaaBooom !
And here was I thinking that MOAB wasn't built for B-52 bomb bay to being with...... ;D
-
While it's an opinion only, Herge could have had Tintin ride with a diamond smuggling Starlifter crew out of Africa to Antwerp. MarolsAir markings or some such thing.
-
Thinking that would be next gen MOAB built without B-52 bomb bay size constraints. KaaBooom !
And here was I thinking that MOAB wasn't built for B-52 bomb bay to being with...... ;D
You be correct. 30 feet long with a diameter of 40.5 inches and delivered by C-130.
-
Thinking that would be next gen MOAB built without B-52 bomb bay size constraints. KaaBooom !
Nonetheless, your mention of B-52 inspired me to think...... a C-141-based "Old Dog (http://www.nopms.net/images/116-Aircraft.jpg)" (the only good thing out of Dale Brown's sky cowboy novels), armed with either MOABs or cruise missile pallets?
-
How about some non-USA operators?
RAAF wanted to buy six back in the late 60s and by the time Treasury signed of on it Lockheed had closed the production line. RAAF then said OK we'll buy 707s but by the time the rest of the Govt. caught up to them there was withdrawal from Vietnam, subsequent draw down and they didn't the aircraft until the 80s. Anyway RAAF C-141s is like C-17s 40 years earlier.
-
There's a techno-thriller out there that has ASAT's kicked out the back of a C-141 in order to take out a Soviet constellation of laser-armed satellites that were controlling access to the orbitals. As I remember the details, the satellites were in a highly elliptical orbit giving increased loiter time over the northern hemisphere but coming in just above the atmosphere over the South Pole. The C-141 staged out of Chile to shoot down these satellites. Sorry, I don't remember the name of the novel nor the author.
-
How about some non-USA operators?
RAAF wanted to buy six back in the late 60s and by the time Treasury signed of on it Lockheed had closed the production line. RAAF then said OK we'll buy 707s but by the time the rest of the Govt. caught up to them there was withdrawal from Vietnam, subsequent draw down and they didn't the aircraft until the 80s. Anyway RAAF C-141s is like C-17s 40 years earlier.
Interesting...
-
How about some non-USA operators?
RAAF wanted to buy six back in the late 60s and by the time Treasury signed of on it Lockheed had closed the production line. RAAF then said OK we'll buy 707s but by the time the rest of the Govt. caught up to them there was withdrawal from Vietnam, subsequent draw down and they didn't the aircraft until the 80s. Anyway RAAF C-141s is like C-17s 40 years earlier.
Interesting...
I concur GTX!!
Is this 'what if' or real world??
If real world, can I ask for your reference please? For I was oblivious to the RAAF (let alone the Australian Government) having any interest to such a capable transport aircraft bar the Hercules!
M.A.D
-
Is this 'what if' or real world??
If real world, can I ask for your reference please? For I was oblivious to the RAAF (let alone the Australian Government) having any interest to such a capable transport aircraft bar the Hercules!
Its real. Here is a general outline of events at that time including the C-5 option that was considered. This is not the only source but its the first I can put my hands on at the moment. Its a few beers later moment here on my end...
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1967/1967%20-%200305.html?search=raaf (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1967/1967%20-%200305.html?search=raaf) c-141
-
I remember reading something about it in a 1960 something bound edition of flight magazine they had in the uni library. The justification mentioned in the story was the need for something more suitable for casualty evacuation from Vietnam. Another story in a later edition discussed the C-5 option and the concern that, so large was the number of troops it could carry, the loss of s single aircraft would result in the deaths of a large percentage of our regular infantry.
-
Some RAAF C-141s would look cool.
-
They could have used the C-141s for the camo pattern trial on the Caribous: green, red and tan wrap arounds. Plus the hivis white tops, AAD support fanta can and a Roulette support aircraft...
-
<has head in closet of doom digging out 1/200 kits>
-
AWACS in place of 707s?
-
They could have used the C-141s for the camo pattern trial on the Caribous: green, red and tan wrap arounds. Plus the hivis white tops, AAD support fanta can and a Roulette support aircraft...
Quick someone - do some profiles of these...please!!!
-
I always wondered how hard it would be to get a C-141 and convert it to a house. Lots of head room for sure. Others have used airliners.
http://www.airplanehome.com/ (http://www.airplanehome.com/)
I'm sure the C-141s have been scrapped by now.
-
Remember being at McChord AFB seeing first C-141 to ever be there.
Was on a look-see tour showing off C-141. This was before McChord had one delivered.
Now,,, is off to bone yard and beyond. :icon_sueno:
-
I remember having the bejesus scared out of me and a group of mates when a long flying C-141 with all the lights out went over us near Woomera back in the early '90s... :o
-
I've had this idea of building a Boeing C-141 as if it had won the competition. I had found that the C-135 was almost the same size as the Lockheed C-141A so my thoughts were to put the C-135 wings up on top of the C-135 fuselage, giving it anhedral and then using the type of engine nacelles the Lockheed C-141 had.
A week or so ago in a thread on the What-If forum I had laid out the idea there too, and low and behold this morning, on SPF, there's a thread there all about it. It's not far off what I had envisioned, the only thing I would have got totally wrong was the main undercarriage arrangement. Now I have something to work on --- (it would also suggest some arrangement for Boeing's XC-5 proposal)
-
Interesting...
-
Looking forward to this! :D
... then using the type of engine nacelles the Lockheed C-141 had.
Curious though ... why the C-141 nacelles? Is it just an aesthetic preference? Or a set of Lockheed nacelles in the spares box?
To me, the 707's JT3D nacelles look quite similar to a B-52H's TF33s (from the side). That would seem to reinforce the family resemblance.
-
C-141 Lockheed documents link, 5 files:
https://c141heaven.info/dotcom/lockheed/476l.php
Vol. 2 includes a drawing of a GE MF239 C-3, aft-fan engine installation. :smiley:
Lots of fun stuff to root through. :smiley:
-
Looking forward to this! :D
... then using the type of engine nacelles the Lockheed C-141 had.
Curious though ... why the C-141 nacelles? Is it just an aesthetic preference? Or a set of Lockheed nacelles in the spares box?
To me, the 707's JT3D nacelles look quite similar to a B-52H's TF33s (from the side). That would seem to reinforce the family resemblance.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the engine used for the C-141 had won it's competition --- so my thoughts were it would've been use on the Boeing. As to the shape of the nacelle, you're probably right, Boeing might have come up with something else. But when you look at the designs for XC-X (C-5) competition, IIRC, they all used the same engine nacelles.
-
I think the utility and overall success of the RAAFs C-17 acquisition suggests that the C-141 procurement would have had great potential if it had gone ahead.
-
I think the utility and overall success of the RAAFs C-17 acquisition suggests that the C-141 procurement would have had great potential if it had gone ahead.
The same for the RCAF with the C-17, the best acquisition the Government ever made for the C.A.F.