Meet FRED, the largest strategic airlifter
in the United States Air Force. And FRED is a weird one, with many unique
features that boggles your mind – like the 90-degree rotating landing gear, the fact
that it can kneel down, the ability to travel in reverse, yes in reverse, and its strange
passenger deck with seats that face backward toward the rear of the airplane. Being a strategic airlifter, FRED can transport
anything, be it submarines, trucks, or intercontinental ballistic missiles ... except for one thing,
which would have looked so cool on FRED’s resume, but it’s Not What You Think! Now you are probably curious who this FRED
is. Well, FRED is the nickname for Lockheed C-5
Galaxy transport aircraft. I just couldn’t say earlier what FRED stands
for, because YouTube doesn’t like profanity during the first 30 seconds of a video. But since we are in the clear now: Meet FRED:
Fu*king Ridiculous Economic Disaster. The C-5 got this nickname because of the enormous
cost overruns during the development of the aircraft, which was due to the everchanging
capability requirements by the US Air Force. But aside from FRED, the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy
has other nicknames like “Big Mac”, “Cumulus Aluminus” and “Linda Lovelace”. Ooo, I see some of you who were lucky teenagers
in the 70s recognized that name. Linda Lovelace was an American actress specialized
in … adult films. The C-5 Galaxy can kneel and take huge loads
from both ends, and that … reminded some people of our late actress. So, before we get into the unique features
of the C-5 Galaxy, you should probably know about FRED’s relationship with Boeing 747. Spoiler alert: the 747 can do some stuff that
the FRED couldn’t. During the 1960s, Lockheed, Douglas and Boeing
competed to design a new large military aircraft, the C-5 Galaxy. While the US Air Force considered the Boeing
design to be superior to that of Lockheed, Boeing lost the competition to Lockheed’s
less expensive design. But don’t feel bad for Boeing, because they
went on to develop the highly successful Boeing 747 civilian airplane which took advantage
of the high-bypass engine technology that they had developed for the C-5A. While there are lots of speculations that
Boeing 747 came out of the C-5 program, it appears not to be the case as the Boeing's
C-5 design differed quite a bit from that of the Boeing 747. But enough with history. Let's shift gears and go in reverse – just
like FRED can. But there’s a problem. While the C-5 can travel backwards on the
ground using reverse thrusters, it doesn’t have a backup camera like today's cars do. The solution is to open the rear cargo door,
where a spotter would sit. All it takes is to advance the throttles “off”
of idle just a little bit on the reverse thrusters for FRED to move backwards. And there is no "beeping” when going backwards,
like you hear on trucks and bigger vehicles. But the truth is many aircraft can back up
on their own thrusters. Be it an old SAAB 37 Viggen, or military transport
aircraft like the C-17 Globemaster or an older C-130 Hercules. Similarly to military aircraft, commercial
jets like the DC-9 can also travel backwards using reverse thrusters, but they almost never
do. See, reverse thrusters are most commonly used
during landing to decelerate a fast moving aircraft by reversing the direction of thrust. With a few exceptions, civilian aircraft are
banned from using reverse thrusters to back up at airports, and that’s why you typically
see a small tug moving the aircraft out of the gate. The ban is mainly due to safety concerns,
as the reverse thrust can stir up debris that can damage the engine or anyone nearby. Reverse thrust is also very loud and consumes
fuel unnecessarily. In addition, newer high-bypass engines cannot
safely use the reverse thrusters until they are already moving. Sounds like reverse thrusters can be pretty
dangerous on the ground, but what would happen if you reverse the engines’ thrust mid-flight? You may be surprised, but thrust reverses
are routinely used mid-flight on the C-5 Galaxy. According to pilots, FRED’s wings produce
so much lift that the airplane doesn’t want to come down from altitude … but with a
little encouragement, by putting on thrust reverse on the two inboard engines, FRED descends
quite quickly. In fact, reverse thrust can be used on many
aircraft while in flight in order to speed up the rate of descent, which could reach
between 10,000 feet to 18,000 feet per minute. The C-5 Galaxy can also carry passengers since
it has a 73-passenger deck above the cargo hold. But unlike commercial jets, the seats on this
deck are facing backwards, for one simple reason. Back in the day, Lockheed discovered that
rear-facing seats are actually safer for passengers compared to front-facing seats. That’s because when aircraft come to a sudden
stop, say during a crash, passengers can put their head and back against the seat, and
the seat would absorb most of the destructive energy of a crash. But if it's safer, why don’t commercial
jets have backward seats? According to one theory, it’s because forward-facing
seats are more profitable for airlines. Let me explain. Since backward seats need to be able to absorb
the crash energy, they would have to take more strain from the passengers when compared
to forward-facing seats. Therefore, the backward seats have to be reinforced
to absorb this energy, which would make them heavier. Adding weight to aircraft means increased
fuel consumption, which translates to less profit for the airlines. So kudos to Lockheed for going “backwards“
in the name of safety, and providing some nice resting area for the crew of the C-5
which includes bunk beds and a nice lounge area. The washroom is roomy as well! By the way, it’s my dream to fly in a C-5,
so if you got connections, hook me up! While the C-5 Galaxy is the largest cargo
plane in the United States Air Force, it's not the largest in the world. The Ukrainian AN-225 Mriya, which was destroyed
by Russian forces, was able to carry 250 tons. It has been reported that a second Mriya is
now being worked on in a secret facility. Apparently all of the essential components
for a second airframe had been previously manufactured. But with Mriya gone, for now, the largest
cargo airplane is AN-124 Ruslan, which is able to carry 150 tons of cargo. The C-5 Galaxy, in comparison, can only carry
125 tons, which is still a lot as it equates to 25 million 844 thousand and 746 … ping
pong balls! But on a more practical note, you can fit
one CH-47 Chinook tandem rotor helicopter inside FRED’s cargo bay. Or you could fit three AH-64 Apache helicopters. For tetris lovers, removing the rotor blades
and stabilizers allows for fitting 6 Apache helicopters into the C-5. You could also fit one coast guard boat, or
even a Mark 5 special operations boat. Even the fuselage of a C-130 would fit inside. The C-5 can also accommodate the transport
of 10 light armored vehicles, weighing 12 tons each, or fit in 2 Bradley Infantry Fighting
Vehicles. An A-10 Warthog would also fit, and so would
36 standard pallets. After all, the C-5 is a strategic airlifter. Just to put things in perspective, during
Operation Desert Storm, C-5 Galaxies only made up 12 percent of the combined airlift
fleet, yet they carried 44% of all airlift cargo. The US Air Force even managed to airdrop a
Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile from the C-5 as they were conducting research
to use the C-5 Galaxy as a platform to launch nuclear missiles. Upon the extraction of the load, the ICBM
was released from its cradle, after which, the minuteman engines ignited – proving
that you can launch ICBMs from airborne platforms. But what was that one thing that FRED couldn’t
carry? That would be the space shuttle. If you’re wondering why the Boeing 747 could
transport the space shuttle, but not the C-5, it all came down to the tails. The C-5 has a T-tail, which would have been
affected by the airflow turbulence created by the shuttle. It was the 747’s regular tail that won this
competition. But what’s interesting is that even though
the C-5 is capable of airlifting main battle tanks, they rarely do. FRED is capable of transporting two M1 Abrams
tanks at the same time, but the US Air Force would rather not do that. The first reason is that airlifting tanks
is incredibly expensive and inefficient. A more efficient way of transporting tanks
and even other armored vehicles over long distances, is by rail or sea. As a result, tank airlifts are incredibly
rare, but they have happened on occasion. The largest airlift of tanks using C-5 Galaxy
happened in 1973, during the Arab-Israeli War, when Israeli forces suffered heavy losses
and needed to be resupplied by the United States. The US government sent 29 M60A1s and M48A3s
to Israel using C-5 galaxies, while the remaining 200 units were transported by sea. And even though the C-5 could carry 2 tanks
at once, it only carried 1, because of concerns over the airframe. Similarly today, while the C-5s can transport
two 60 ton M1 Abrams tanks at the same time, the sheer weight of these vehicles results
in a lot of stress on the airframe, wearing out the airplane prematurely. This is why C-5’s only carry one Abrams
tank at a time, and only if an emergency delivery is required. It’s worth noting that back in June of 1989,
FRED carried four light tanks at once, when it performed a world record airdrop. The C-5B air dropped four 42,000 pound Sheridan
tanks and 73 combat-ready troops over Fort Bragg in North Carolina. The Paratroopers had to wait for the tanks
to go first, because scientific research shows that a tank landing on you is directly correlated
with ruining an otherwise fine day! The C-5 also has one of the highest operating
costs of any aircraft in the US Air Force, at $100,941 dollars per hour. Still slightly behind the B-2 bomber and E-4
Nightwatch. One of the reasons for this high cost … is
fuel. Aside from the 125 tons of cargo, the C-5
Galaxy also has to carry fuel, and a lot of it. In fact, the FRED’s 12 integral wing tanks
can hold 51,450 gallons of jet fuel which is equivalent to six railroad tankers. And sometimes that’s not even enough, so
the aircraft has to be refueled mid flight. With all that weight, it makes you wonder,
what kind of landing gear can handle the sheer weight of this massive bird? The landing gear of the much heavier Airbus
A380 has of 22 tires. But the C-5 Galaxy, even though lighter, has
an additional six tires, for a total of 28. But that’s for a good reason. The A380 can only operate out of airports
with reinforced runways and taxiways, due to its weight. But the C-5 was designed so that it could
operate out of all kinds of runways. FRED’s 28 tires and their unique design,
spread out the weight of the airplane over a larger area, which allows it to taxi on
unpaved surfaces including snow and even mud. Yeah surprisingly mud, or more correctly wet
soil, does not interfere with the functionality of the landing gear, at least in this artificially
soaked soil. During testing, it was found that FRED had
the most difficulty, that is, requiring the highest thrust, only on the first and second
passes. After that, the C-5 would have compacted the
soil enough to make it easier to taxi. Lockheed even performed similar tests on soil
that was covered by 12 to 14 inches of snow. Not surprisingly the aircraft had no issues
taxing around and even unloading its cargo. Finally, the C-5 can also take off from unpaved
runways with most of the runway taking off as well. Several other considerations were taken into
account when designing FRED’s landing gear. One aspect was the C-5s requirement for a
wide center of gravity range which allowed it to transport mixed loads. Secondly, FRED has a unique ability to kneel
to minimum ground clearance which helps in loading the cargo. As a result of this requirement, having 4
nose tires allowed the spreading of the weight when loading heavy cargo such as tanks. Additionally, kneeling is especially important
as it can lower the cargo deck to the height of a truck-bed, which facilitates loading
and unloading operations. These special requirements meant that in order
to fit the wheels inside the fuselage, the landing gear assembly had to be designed so
it could rotate 90 degrees before stowage. In case you are wondering how the tires are
changed, you could either jack the whole aircraft up in order to perform maintenance on all
the tires and brakes, or you could do it individually, because each set of wheels can also be individually
raised for easy access during maintenance. The C-5s were produced in two batches. One of the batches was defective to say the
least. Eighty one C-5A's were produced between 1968
and 1973 and fifty C-5B’s were produced between 1985 and 1989. The defects surfaced in the mid-1970s when
wing cracks were found in the C-5A fleet. The decision was made to limit the maximum
weight on all C-5As to 50,000 pounds. Then seventy seven C-5As underwent a re-winging
program between 1981 and 1987 at a cost of $7.1 billion dollars in 2023 money. The redesigned wing featured a newly developed
aluminum alloy which didn't exist when the aircraft was first produced. New wings have a structural service life of
over 50,000 hours. The C-5Bs, of course, were already built with
new wings and more than 100 additional system modifications that improved reliability over
the legacy C-5As. In 1998, the US Air Force decided to further
modernize the fleet of C-5s based on a study that showed 80% of the C-5 airframe service
life was still remaining. As a result, fifty two C-5 Galaxies were upgraded
to the C-5M Super Galaxy variant with the remaining airframes being retired in 2017. The C-5M Super Galaxy featured new avionics,
glass cockpit, new auto-pilot, and most importantly, new engines: the General Electric CF-6 engines. The new engines, however, were not new technology. The CF-6 engines entered service in 1971. Nevertheless, they had been upgraded over
the years and used extensively on Boeing 767s and 747s. They provide 20% more thrust than the legacy
TF39 engines, and were also much quieter. The fleet of Super Galaxy is expected to remain
in service at least until 2040.
