After watching this video you’re going to have two very important exclamations.
- I hope they don’t run out of runway, and
- Where the hell was their rate of climb? Sheesh!
By the way, the C-5 was loaded to the max at 700,000 pounds — which is 317.5 tons — on a 99° F day. It could only have been worse had they been taking off at, say, 6,000-feet AGL.
BZ
I watched an AN-225 take off at gross which used every bit of the 9,500 foot runway. That was a sight to see. I think their only option would have been to land straight ahead. They were maybe 5 miles past rotation before they banked, probably 1/2 standard rate.
My own highest density altitude takeoff was 13,500. I was 3/4 gross in a PA-28 with 160 HP engine. I used about 90% of runway length before getting to rotation speed. It was nice that it was slightly descending, flat terrain straight out. My only option was to land in the weeds if I could not climb. I could not even return for landing because of rising terrain everywhere except extended center line along my departure. Night departure presented too high a risk. 0500 was first light which was my planned departure.
I suspect that those crews have tripled checked their performance calculations. I surely did. So no surprise they got what they got. No surprises is a good thing.
Watched likely the same plane take off — Antonov AN-225 — at Mather AFB several years back. Mather has an 11,000-foot runway. Of course, because that’s how shite like that rolls, I had no camera with me whatsoever.
You, Rick, already likely know the C-5 Galaxy is THE most maintenance-intensive airframe in the entire USAF inventory. For every hour of flight it takes twice that on the ground. The C-5 also costs $100,941 per hour to fly.
Thanks for reading and commenting, sir.
BZ
They had PLENTY of room, and if they’d been at someplace like Denver, they never would have left the ramp. They did the normal profile, probably 2000 feet and were held by departure, waiting higher.