C-133 At Tucson Airport
Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:55 pm
Anyone know what became of the C-133 that was parked in a remote area of the Tucson airport (other side of the runway from the terminal)? I took the picture in 1994.
<img src="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e14/APG85/C-133Tucson1994.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">
<img src="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e14/APG85/C-133Tucson1994.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">
Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:58 pm
Lets' try this for a picture (I'm learning).
Mon Jan 16, 2006 9:38 am
That's a sad waste. Seemed like it was complete when I last saw it. Would have made a nice museum piece........
Mon Jan 16, 2006 11:39 am
Are the two still at Mojave?
Mon Jan 16, 2006 12:15 pm
I thought there were 4? Can't remember but 4 sticks in my head.
C-133 Cargomasters at Mojave
Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:59 am
There are two C-133 Cargomasters at Mojave, N136AB and N201AB.
[url=http://www.air-and-space.com/Mojave%20military%2020010910.htm]
[/url]
[url=http://www.air-and-space.com/Mojave%20military%2020010910.htm]
[/url]
Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:16 am
I stoped in there about 5 years ago when ferrying airplanes back east. The airport manager told me the owner bought them to be used as a flying hospitial but these planes had some kind of flap issues or something. It would be neat to see one fly but the 133 as a design must have some serious issues.
Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:49 pm
One of my flight instructors was a C.O. of a C-133 squadron and he said they were a really horrible aircraft. On paper they look great, fast, roomy cockpit, huge load carrying capability for it's day and modern looking even today. Largest aircraft in the U.S inventory for a few years.
He said the problem was that the C-133 apparently had some type of super high frequency vibration that wreaked havoc on the aircraft's systems. The pilot's thought it was a problem with those 18' diameter three bladed props as the tips were travelling at supersonic speeds even at cruise. Engineering denied it was the props, and stonewalled any corrective ideas put forward. Then airplanes started falling out of the sky. Many of the missions involved flying out of Travis AFB in California to the Korean peninsula with a load of Atlas missiles. C-133's were disappearing without any good reasons. He said that propellors would fail without notice and on one flight while cruising across the Atlantic he had the number one and two propellors slam into flat pitch and the aircraft was slammed sideways. Then, just as mysteriously they corrected and they were able to make it to Japan. Sometimes in the cockpit the insulation on the wiring would just fall off the wires and often ,after having systems failures inflight, a post flight inspection would reveal electrical wiring had snapped inside the cargo area inline with the number 2 and 3 propellor arcs. Once he made an emergency landing , I think it was Cape Canaveral with complete hydraulic failure; no flaps, no control boosts, no brakes and he used the entire 14,000 ft runway. On preflights, sometimes they would find long cracks in the aluminum skin. These are just a few of the stories he told me about his least favorite aircraft.
He said the problem was that the C-133 apparently had some type of super high frequency vibration that wreaked havoc on the aircraft's systems. The pilot's thought it was a problem with those 18' diameter three bladed props as the tips were travelling at supersonic speeds even at cruise. Engineering denied it was the props, and stonewalled any corrective ideas put forward. Then airplanes started falling out of the sky. Many of the missions involved flying out of Travis AFB in California to the Korean peninsula with a load of Atlas missiles. C-133's were disappearing without any good reasons. He said that propellors would fail without notice and on one flight while cruising across the Atlantic he had the number one and two propellors slam into flat pitch and the aircraft was slammed sideways. Then, just as mysteriously they corrected and they were able to make it to Japan. Sometimes in the cockpit the insulation on the wiring would just fall off the wires and often ,after having systems failures inflight, a post flight inspection would reveal electrical wiring had snapped inside the cargo area inline with the number 2 and 3 propellor arcs. Once he made an emergency landing , I think it was Cape Canaveral with complete hydraulic failure; no flaps, no control boosts, no brakes and he used the entire 14,000 ft runway. On preflights, sometimes they would find long cracks in the aluminum skin. These are just a few of the stories he told me about his least favorite aircraft.
Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:36 pm
Wed Jan 18, 2006 5:39 am
Wow....
Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:35 am
marine air wrote:One of my flight instructors was a C.O. of a C-133 squadron and he said they were a really horrible aircraft. On paper they look great, fast, roomy cockpit, huge load carrying capability for it's day and modern looking even today. Largest aircraft in the U.S inventory for a few years.
He said the problem was that the C-133 apparently had some type of super high frequency vibration that wreaked havoc on the aircraft's systems. The pilot's thought it was a problem with those 18' diameter three bladed props as the tips were travelling at supersonic speeds even at cruise. Engineering denied it was the props, and stonewalled any corrective ideas put forward. Then airplanes started falling out of the sky. Many of the missions involved flying out of Travis AFB in California to the Korean peninsula with a load of Atlas missiles. C-133's were disappearing without any good reasons. He said that propellors would fail without notice and on one flight while cruising across the Atlantic he had the number one and two propellors slam into flat pitch and the aircraft was slammed sideways. Then, just as mysteriously they corrected and they were able to make it to Japan. Sometimes in the cockpit the insulation on the wiring would just fall off the wires and often ,after having systems failures inflight, a post flight inspection would reveal electrical wiring had snapped inside the cargo area inline with the number 2 and 3 propellor arcs. Once he made an emergency landing , I think it was Cape Canaveral with complete hydraulic failure; no flaps, no control boosts, no brakes and he used the entire 14,000 ft runway. On preflights, sometimes they would find long cracks in the aluminum skin. These are just a few of the stories he told me about his least favorite aircraft.
Amazing there weren't a lot of accidents given these design characteristics.
Wed Jan 18, 2006 9:35 am
How long were they in service?
Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:26 pm
My Instructor flew them from 1958 to late 1960 and then he was an Air Advisor to the Tenn Air Guard from 1960 to 1965. He said that their primary mission was to relocate missiles to strategic hot spots. As they began falling out of the sky, the Air Force reduced their responsiblities until the C-141 and later the C-5 became available. There were only about 50 of the C-133's built and there were quite a few lost. They started retiring them as early as possible based on their flight times.
I read that they could carry up to 200 troops, but I doubt the air force ever used them for that. He said that once the "Brass" came around to understanding the problem with the props, the airplanes had too many flight hours on them and they were ruined. I know the C-130A's also had three bladed props and were retrofitted to four bladed props. Don't know if they ever had any problems.
I read that they could carry up to 200 troops, but I doubt the air force ever used them for that. He said that once the "Brass" came around to understanding the problem with the props, the airplanes had too many flight hours on them and they were ruined. I know the C-130A's also had three bladed props and were retrofitted to four bladed props. Don't know if they ever had any problems.
Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:47 pm
A listing of C-133 Accident/Incedent info can be found here:
http://www.angelfire.com/wa2/c133bcargo ... dents.html
http://www.angelfire.com/wa2/c133bcargo ... dents.html
Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:41 pm
Air Enthusiast March/April 2004 had the first decent history of the type I've come across.
50 built, 8 flying losses...not an impressive record, I'm afarid. But remember, Douglas was pushing the edge of turboprop technology. I'm not sure if the large Russian turboprops were any better.
Does anyone know if any planes are in hand to preserve the flying example in Alaska? I bet an AMC-base museum would like one...and it would be easier to fly it in than truck one from Mojave.
50 built, 8 flying losses...not an impressive record, I'm afarid. But remember, Douglas was pushing the edge of turboprop technology. I'm not sure if the large Russian turboprops were any better.
Does anyone know if any planes are in hand to preserve the flying example in Alaska? I bet an AMC-base museum would like one...and it would be easier to fly it in than truck one from Mojave.