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.