The second post in my multi-post series about Douglas/McDonnell Douglas strategic airlifters focuses on the first-generation of gas turbine-powered heavy-lift transport planes conceived by Douglas in the 1950s (by which time long-range airlift was becoming enshrined as a pillar of US strategic military aviation policy). As explained in my previous post on the C-74 Globemaster and C-124 Globemaster II, Douglas had tinkered with re-engining the C-124 with turboprop engines, producing the YC-124B (aka C-127) prototype turboprop airlifter, but test flights revealed that the operating range of the YC-124 fluctuated with altitudes because the C-124 airframe was unpressurized (although the YC-124B had a pressurized cockpit). Thus, this post will focus on Douglas designs for turboprop-powered heavy-lift aircraft, including the C-133 Cargomaster and the unbuilt C-132 project.
Top: Desktop model of the C-133 Cargomaster at the Western Museum of Flight Bottom: C-133B Cargomaster (serial number 59-0529) flying over San Francisco Bay, 1960 |
After recognizing the deficiencies of the YC-124B in terms of operating range at varying altitudes, the Douglas Aircraft Company realized that pressurizing the entire C-124 design would require a panoply of design changes, including fixing the auxiliary floors in the down position and latching them to form a tension tie across the fuselage (effectively eliminating the ability to haul outsized cargo), and reskinning sections of the fuselage with thicker-gauge aluminum. Douglas therefore envisaged a new large strategic transport design, the Model 1324 (dubbed 'C-124X' internally by Douglas), which retained the wings of the YC-124B/YKC-124B but differed in having a circular cross-section fuselage. Early designs for the Model 1324 had the nose ramp and tail shape of the C-124, but later proposals had the ramp moved to the tail section to enable air-dropping of cargo. Nine Model 1324 configurations were proposed, all varying in turboprop engine options, wing flap types, and gross weight levels. Despite the improvements in wing and fuselage geometry, the cargo deck of the Model 1324 was far from truckbed height, so on March 24, 1953, the Model 1324 was abandoned in favor of the Model 1333, which had a new shoulder-mounted wing that had a revised airfoil, thickness, twist, and leading and trailing edge sweep angles, as well as the fuselage being lowered to the ground so that the cargo deck was low enough for trucks and military vehicles to be loaded into the aircraft. Other features of the Model 1333 included elimination of the secondary deck, all passenger provisions and pressurization.
Douglas C-133A (serial number 56-2010) at RAF Lakenheath, Suffolk, England, in May 1969 |
On August 10, the Model 1333 was given the designation C-133 by the US Air Force, and on April 23, 1956 the C-133 made its first flight; no C-133 prototypes were ever ordered because no other aircraft offering the immediate prospect of the performance and cargo capabilities of the C-133. Operational deployment of the C-133 Cargomaster with the Military Air Transport Service commenced in August 1957, and a total of 50 C-133s (35 C-133As and 15 C-133Bs) were built and deployed. Although the C-133A was not specifically designed to carry ICBMs, the C-133B had rear cargo doors modified to open to the side, making ICBM loading much easier. Douglas in May 1959 offered a variant of the C-133B with improved cargo capacity, an aerodynamically efficient and symmetrically tapered rear fuselage, and four Allison T61 turboprops, known as the Model 1476, but this design did not progress beyond the drawing board. During their service life, C-133s ferried ICBMs to and from missile silos in the US as well as Atlas, Titan, and Saturn rockets to Cape Canaveral to be used to launch Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo manned spacecraft, and they helped transport war material and troops to US bases in Western and Central Europe while proving invaluable in the Vietnam War. The C-133 served with MATS until 1971, when it was replaced by the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy.
No comments:
Post a Comment