Re: C-17

Date:         12 Dec 96 03:49:23 
From:         faurecm@halcyon.com (C. Marin Faure)
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.2790@ohare.Chicago.COM>, kls@ohare.Chicago.COM
(Karl Swartz) wrote:


> Back to the subject of the C-17, there were talks a while back about
> Boeing either merging with MD or maybe just taking Douglas, allowing
> McDonnell to focus on the military market.  The more recent agreement
> for Douglas to do contract work for Boeing seems like it *could* be a
> step in that direction.  If so, what would happen to the C-17?  Since
> it's built in Long Beach, it seems likely that it would become part of
> the Boeing fold along with the rest of Douglas.  If so, that would be
> a bit ironic after Boeing's YC-16 lost to the C-17!

Actually, the Boeing plane was the YC-14.  I joined the company just prior
to the planes being flown off to be stored in the desert so I never got to
see them perform.  Our department had shot a lot of film of them, however,
and their performace was quite impressive both in the air and on the
ground.  Their performance was so impressive, in fact, that the Soviets
copied the design almost to a T, although their version is somewhat
smaller.  The YC-14 actually lost to the YC-15, although nothing much
happened after that.  I don't know if the C-17 is a derivative of that
first YC-15 design or if it started on a clean piece of paper.

One of the main reasons the YC-14 lost out was that it could not
accomodate an M-1 Main Battle Tank.  But as it turns out, they don't ship
those by air, anyway, as the Gulf War demonstrated.  They go by ship so
that a bunch of them can be unloaded on the scene at one time instead of
trickling in via airplane.

C. Marin Faure
   author, Flying a Floatplane