C-17 Belly Landing at Bagram

Military aircraft accidents/mishaps.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Elliboom

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2006, 18:21
  • Location: Lincoln, NE

Unread post04 Feb 2009, 22:13

What's the story TC, looks like she is from Charleston. My first guess is an accident since you would not normally land a jet gear up on the busiest strip in the country, you would pick someplace less important.
Offline

StolichnayaStrafer

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 885
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2008, 16:50
  • Location: Dodge City, Moscowchusetts

Unread post04 Feb 2009, 22:45

Hope everybody involved is ok. :(
Why is the vodka gone?
Why is the vodka always gone... oh- that's why!
Hide the vodka!!!
Offline

Asif

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 2865
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

Unread post04 Feb 2009, 23:40

Stars & Stripes wrote:C-17 mishap closes Bagram base
Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Sunday, February 1, 2009

A mishap involving a C-17 cargo plane has forced the U.S. military to close its key air base near Kabul, Afghanistan, "until further notice," officials said late Friday.

According to U.S. Forces Afghanistan, the C-17 landed at Bagram Airfield on Friday night without having its landing gear fully extended, "causing a small fire."

No injuries were reported in the incident, according to a short press release issued late Friday. An investigation team will be appointed to look into the incident.

As of Saturday, military officials had not released information on where the plane had been flying from, or to which unit the crew and aircraft belonged.

Bagram, north of Kabul, has long been the main U.S. air hub in Afghanistan. It is the largest U.S. base in Afghanistan, and around 20,000 international troops call Bagram home. During the Soviet war in Afghanistan, it was also a major Soviet base.

Since the invasion in 2001 to oust the Taliban, Bagram has undergone extensive construction and renovation work, including the building of the new runway. Estimates put its cost at around $68 million.

In October, a U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane was destroyed when it overshot the runway at Bagram while landing. One crewmember was injured in that incident, which involved a P-3 Orion.

source: http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?sect ... icle=60393


AirForceTimes wrote:C-17 damaged in gear-up landing at Bagram

A C-17 Globemaster made a “gear up” landing at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan late Friday.

The crew got off the plane safely, but there was a small fire and extensive damage to plane’s underside, according to Air Force reports.

[...]

Source: http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/ ... h_020209w/
Attachments
090204-F-1234X-001.jpg
Crash recovery and emergency management crews survey a C-17 Globemaster III Jan. 31 as it rests on the active runway of Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, after landing Jan. 30 with its landing gear retracted. [USAF photo]
Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 4004
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post05 Feb 2009, 00:36

Yes, it was a Charleston jet. The crew is ok. Everyone walked away from it. Right now, I can't tell you anymore than what you already know.

At this time, I must ask everyone to please not PM me asking for further information. This is for two reasons: 1) I don't know enough about what happened to give you anything more, and 2) We're on a gag order right now, as per the Wing/CC.

Remember, Big Brother is real, and he is watching us!
"He counted on America to be passive...He counted wrong." -- President Ronald Reagan
Offline

parrothead

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3280
  • Joined: 10 May 2004, 23:04

Unread post05 Feb 2009, 04:36

TC -

Thanks for letting us know everyone's OK :) Sorry to hear about the mishap.
No plane on Sunday, maybe be one come Monday...
www.parrotheadjeff.com
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 4004
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post05 Feb 2009, 06:29

Yeah. Thanks for that. Now that I know the crew is ok, I just hope they can get the jet back in good shape.

Just from the pic that was released, it doesn't look as bad as 0196 did when it went off the runway at Bagram a few years ago. Of course, they took that one back to Long Beach, and rebuilt her...even upgraded her to Blk. 16 standards, which is just under the newest production block (17).

I don't know when the jet will fly again, but if they could get 0196 flying again, then I'm pretty sure that this one will fly again. The AF never really wants to write off a $219 million asset, especially when the rest of the jet still looks like it's in one piece.

Other than that, I don't know too much more than you. Time will tell the rest.
"He counted on America to be passive...He counted wrong." -- President Ronald Reagan
Offline

Asif

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 2865
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

Unread post05 Feb 2009, 13:31

BAGRAM AIR BASE wrote:Bagram pulls together for historical aircraft recovery

by Staff Sgt. Jason Lake
455th Air Expeditionary Wing

2/4/2009 - BAGRAM AIR FIELD, Afghanistan -- More than 120 Airmen, Defense Department civilians and contractors successfully removed a crippled C-17 Globemaster III from the runway here Feb. 2 and restored full air operations after a historic aircraft recovery operation.

Emergency response crews sprang into action Jan. 30 shortly after the 150-ton aircraft screeched to a halt with none of its landing gear down - a first-time incident in the aircraft's 16-year history.

While none of the crew suffered significant injuries in the incident, the disabled aircraft presented a significant challenge for maintaining air operations.

"A lengthy runway closure is our worst nightmare at Bagram," said Brig. Gen. Mike Holmes, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing commander. "The Airmen, sailors, and soldiers on the 455th team work extremely hard every day to make sure coalition forces all over Afghanistan can count us to be there with close air support, airdrop and airlift, personnel recovery, and electronic attack, when and where they need it. We knew we had to find a way to keep doing our job while the runway was closed."

Col. Tim Strasburger, 455th Expeditionary Operations Group commander, led a team of aviators, airfield operators, air traffic control personnel and wing safety to figure out how to safely continue airfield operations.

Crash recovery, emergency management, aircraft engineers and maintainers, some of whom had flown in from other bases within the theater of operations, worked tirelessly to formulate a plan and gather supplies needed to lift the more than aircraft up long enough to extend its landing gear.

"Being a first time incident did not impact our course of action ... this is what we train for," explained Tech. Sgt. Joseph Mixson, lead team chief for crash recovery here. "We put together a group of experts so we could pool our resources and see what was available to work with at the time. Once we knew what assets were available, we set forth an initial recovery plan based on the guidance provided from the disabled aircraft recovery technical order."

Lt. Col. Greg Urtso, on-scene commander during the recovery operation, said the aircraft experts kept their focus on the recovery effort with the help of mission support personnel.

Airmen from the 455th Expeditionary Mission Support Group provided security, construction equipment, transportation, communications equipment, and lodging for experts brought in from outside Afghanistan. Medical staff from the 455th Expeditionary Medical Support Group took air samples inside the aircraft to ensure it was safe for personnel.

"The level of cooperation and willingness to do whatever it took was awe inspiring," Colonel Urtso said.

After more than two days of concentrated effort, the recovery crew managed to lift the $200 million aircraft high enough to extend its wheels and prepare it for removal from the runway.

"We used a 120-ton crane assisted by six 26-ton airbags to finally lift the aircraft from the runway," explained Sergeant Mixson. "The major lesson learned was that the technical data for a C-17 recovery did not list any alternate methods. We were not able to place the airbags in the positions they needed to be because the entire fuselage section was laying on the runway. The crane allowed us to [lift the aircraft and] get the airbags into position."

Shortly after the aircraft was removed from the runway, Col. Clifton Blanks, 455th Expeditionary Maintenance Group commander, applauded the work of everyone involved in the safely executed recovery effort.

"I'm extremely proud of the whole team that raised the C-17," he said. "They did something that hadn't ever been done before. This event serves as another example of the true mettle of the men and women in the 455th Air Expeditionary Wing. While a group of folks were busy working the recovery of the C-17, much of the rest of the wing figured out a way to safely and effectively continue combat operations with our runway closed."

source: http://www.bagram.afcent.af.mil/news/st ... =123133866
Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration
Offline

Elliboom

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2006, 18:21
  • Location: Lincoln, NE

Unread post05 Feb 2009, 14:25

understood TC, I figured you would not be able to give a details, but it was worth a shot. I am confident they will get her back in the air. Just send her down the PDM line and it will be good as new.
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 4004
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post05 Feb 2009, 23:52

That's what I'm thinking too. As I said, this bird is in nowhere near as bad shape as 01-0196 was when it suffered its landing accident back in 05. If you saw her sitting on the ramp today at Charleston, you'd never know anything had happened, until you read the commemorative plaque inside of the jet. It's also the reason why it was named "The Spirit of Enduring Freedom".

It sucks that this happened, but at least if it had to, it's too bad that it couldn't have been on an older, crappy bird. Perhaps one of the rag@$$ed 91 or 92 tails? If nothing else, it would've kept one of those out of another rotation to The Dirty Deid, Done Dirt Cheap.
"He counted on America to be passive...He counted wrong." -- President Ronald Reagan
Offline

VPRGUY

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 853
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2005, 18:03

Unread post08 Feb 2009, 02:48

Perhaps one of the rag@$$ed 91 or 92 tails?

Just when I start to get proud of the 64 models I fly on......
Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 4004
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post08 Feb 2009, 04:27

Well, when you have a hot rod, you hope the hot rod will be able to perform the best that it can. However, when your hot rod has suffered from overuse and abuse, along with spending long, hot, dirty, and humid summers in the desert, Sierra is going to break.

These planes are being used so much, that I'm afraid some of them will have to either go back through the line at Long Beach, or even worse, go to DM before their time. It really sucks too. Some of the planes that come back from 60 days downrange look like hammered $h!t.

Balls 2 will get fixed. It will take time, but it'll fly again.
"He counted on America to be passive...He counted wrong." -- President Ronald Reagan
Offline

Elliboom

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2006, 18:21
  • Location: Lincoln, NE

Unread post09 Feb 2009, 03:00

VPRGUY wrote:
Perhaps one of the rag@$$ed 91 or 92 tails?

Just when I start to get proud of the 64 models I fly on......


I wish we had something as new as 1964. Our newest is 63' and the oldest is 57. But TC is right, they are plain old beating the Sierra out of those beautiful Globemasters.
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 4004
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post09 Feb 2009, 04:28

Yeah us, and the -135s too. I have no idea how those 57 and 58 birds that you -135 guys fly are still going like they are. Granted, I know a lot of the -135's flying time consists of taking off, orbiting, and then landing several hours later. You guys don't have those "4 Banger in the Box" @$$ pains like us, but still...It's a freakin' 50+ year old aircraft.

The big craniums need to take a good long look at the collateral effects from the wars, and that might help them make some decisions about the next course of action to take. I don't think AMC's birds can take too many more years of status quo. The personnel can't either.
"He counted on America to be passive...He counted wrong." -- President Ronald Reagan
Offline

Asif

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 2865
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

Unread post15 Feb 2009, 00:27

Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration
Offline

Mushmouth

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 260
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 05:59

Unread post16 Feb 2009, 12:35

Yeah, i know big brother is watching but just from my educated guess, hahaha, they forgot to drop the gear. All I know is, due to that runway being closed, we had to take on extra sorties since the 15's could not take off. But here's a few I recieved while in the AOR. Have more, will post later.


Mush

Greetings from the Died!!
Attachments
Slide1.JPG
Slide5.JPG
Slide7.JPG
Slide10.JPG
Slide8.JPG
Somebody wasn't paying attention to the horn.
00-06 Shaw GE-129
06-07 Kunsan GE-100
07-11 Dyess B1B GE-102
11-12 Kunsan GE-100
12-'' JBMDL CF6-50
Next

Return to Mishaps

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest