Gilles wrote:Tirana was used as an example of a place where poor runway conditions allowed the C-17 to demonstrate its direct delivery capability.
Incorrect.
Tirana allowed the C-17 to demonstrate it's direct delivery capability, but it had nothing to do with poor runway conditions (or very little anways, they do specifically quote the poor surface conditions of the runway, but that's not the main point as we will see)
The issue seems to be that you don't understand what direct delivery is.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... s95026.pdf
Direct delivery involves bypassing a main operating base to land directly at another base in the theater
of operations. This base may or may not be a small, austere airfield.
So right off the bat, direct delivery does not necessarily have anything to do with it being a bad surface (even though it wasn't the best in this case).
http://www.afa.org/media/reports/april.asp
The ramp was soon handling more than four times the acceptable load.
We have a very congested airport that was also running C-130 missions and Apache flights.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... 92/PBW.htm
Also, the C-17's superior ground maneuvering allows more aircraft to be on the ramp offloading supplies to our forces. Eight C-17s can park in the space required for 3 C-5s (C-17/C-5 payloads are about the same). In addition, the C-17 has a smaller turning radius than the C-141 and C-5, and backs up like a C-l30. This means that the C-17 offers a 3 to 1 advantage over C-5 in cargo throughput on a 500,000 square foot ramp.
You can see why a C-5 would NOT have worked in Tirana. The airport was already severely overextended so there simply wasn't room to deal with them.
Also, they mentioned '96% mission-capable rate' for a reason. When trying to support high-tempo operations into a crowded airfield, you simply CANNOT afford to have planes breakdown at that airfield. Not only do they consume valuable ramp space, but then you have to send in a special flight to bring the parts to fix it.
The C-17 has several attributes that make it work well for TDD. Rough field capability is there if you need it. At crowded airports its compact footprint (the C-17 wingspan is only 1.3m wider than the Il-76 and its fuselage is 0.2m shorter than the stretched Il-76MF while still carrying more cargo), ease of ground maneuver and speed of loading and unloading allow a high throughput of material. It's intercontinental range and aerial refueling capability (which the Il-76 doesn't have) enable it to reach anywhere. It's defensive aids and NVG support (another thing the Il-76 lacks) enables it to go into hostile zones.
While not every attribute is needed in every situation, the portfolio of capabilities adds up to a very potent combination that allows extreme flexibility and capability.
