Seriously C-17 v. C-141 (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 8/12/2025 11:57:37 PM EDT
|
It's been 30+ years since I was on a Starlifter. The 17 was concept drawings in Airman magazine at that time. Seriously; why is the 17 better than the 141? |
|
Rough field landing Generational differences in avionics and engine capability. Class cockpit bit situational awareness, and crew management capability. Much more pleasant to jump out of And it just looks bad ass! Star lifter look like a fat whale the C-17 looks like a killer whale! |
|
The future is...well 40 years old at this point. But anyway, here's some heavy lifting that Grok did for me because I am lazy (and because the answers should be obvious): Here’s a detailed comparison of the **main specifications** followed by a judgment on which is "better" and why: --- ### ✈️ BASIC COMPARISON TABLE | Spec | **C-17 Globemaster III** | **C-141 Starlifter** | | ----------------------------- | ------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | | **Manufacturer** | Boeing (originally McDonnell Douglas) | Lockheed | | **First Flight** | 1991 | 1963 | | **Introduced** | 1995 | 1965 | | **Retired** | In service | 2006 (last retired) | | **Crew** | 3 (pilot, copilot, loadmaster) | 5 (2 pilots, 2 flight engineers, 1 loadmaster) | | **Length** | 174 ft (53 m) | 168 ft 4 in (51.3 m) | | **Wingspan** | 169.8 ft (51.75 m) | 160 ft (48.8 m) | | **Height** | 55.1 ft (16.8 m) | 39.3 ft (12 m) | | **Max Takeoff Weight** | 585,000 lb (265,352 kg) | 323,100 lb (146,558 kg) | | **Payload Capacity** | 170,900 lb (77,519 kg) | 70,847 lb (32,138 kg) | | **Range (with max payload)** | \~2,400 nmi (4,444 km) | \~2,280 nmi (4,220 km) | | **Cruising Speed** | Mach 0.74 (\~450 knots / 830 km/h) | Mach 0.74 (\~500 knots / 920 km/h) | | **Cargo Compartment** | 88 ft long, 18 ft wide, 12.3 ft high | 93 ft long, 10.3 ft wide, 9 ft high | | **Notable Cargo** | M1 Abrams tank, helicopters, troops | Light vehicles, troops, pallets | | **Short/rough field capable** | Yes | No | --- ### ✅ **Key Advantages of the C-17 Globemaster III** | Feature | Advantage | | --------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | **Payload** | Can carry **2.5x more cargo** than the C-141 | | **Cargo Bay Size** | Wider and taller – fits **modern armored vehicles**, helicopters | | **Versatility** | Can operate from **short and unpaved runways**, including tactical combat zones | | **Automation & Crew** | Smaller crew needed thanks to modern systems | | **Reliability & Maintainability** | Built with more modern materials and systems for easier maintenance | --- ### ⚠️ C-141 Starlifter Limitations * Developed during the **early Cold War**, its cargo bay was too **narrow and low** for evolving military equipment. * Limited to **long, paved runways**, unlike the C-17. * Was stretched (C-141B and C) to improve cargo capacity, but still couldn’t match newer needs. --- ### 🏆 **Which Is Better?** > **The C-17 Globemaster III is objectively superior** in nearly every category: * **Payload** * **Cargo flexibility** * **Operational versatility** * **Survivability and deployment options** It's not just better — it was **designed to *replace* the C-141**, fixing its shortcomings. --- Let me know if you want to compare the C-17 to the C-5 Galaxy or the newer KC-390 as well. |
|
Originally Posted By ar154all: It's been 30+ years since I was on a Starlifter. The 17 was concept drawings in Airman magazine at that time. Seriously; why is the 17 better than the 141? |
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
288
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By FantasticPlastic: 80% of the 141s had cracks in the main wing spar. That should be sufficient to explain why I prefer the C-17. The 141s are mothballed. If a serious war arises, the plan is to fly them until their wings fall off, no shit. Are there any left that can fly? Let the arfcoms know. 
|
Preferred pronoun: MARINE
|
Originally Posted By FantasticPlastic: 80% of the 141s had cracks in the main wing spar. That should be sufficient to explain why I prefer the C-17. The 141s are mothballed. If a serious war arises, the plan is to fly them until their wings fall off, no shit. <- C-141 Loadmaster for 15 years. We flew the shit out of them and the low level airdrop missions really took its toll. The airplane was designed to be a strategic airlifter, and the stuff we eventually did with it really killed its service life. There are NO mothballed 141's in the boneyard. The only ones still around are static displays, none of which will ever fly again. |
|
Originally Posted By ar154all: It's been 30+ years since I was on a Starlifter. The 17 was concept drawings in Airman magazine at that time. 30 years ago, in 1995, the C-17 was already operational at CHS. A long ways away from "concept drawings." |
|
Originally Posted By NotIssued: Not to make you feel old, but the LAST contracted C-17 was delivered to Charleston (same as the first one) in 2013. And then there is this: www.twz.com/air/boeing-in-talks-to-restart-c-17-production |
|
Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I'm so old that I jumped out of C-141s...  I worked on the HALO Committee at Special Forces School, the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center at Bragg. We jumped C-130s and 141s. Several of our guys sat with the C17 designers and engineers going over seating, free-fall oxygen system rigging, the doors and ramp, lighting. etc. Fifteen years later my first C17 jump was at 18,500 feet -- with a passenger buckled to the front of my harness. My first C17 combat ride was to get into Baghdad International -- a steep night blacked-out turning descent from 12,000 feet. I liked the C-141 -- but the C17 is awesome. Quiet, spacious, comfortable, powerful, and capable. I wouldn't go back. |
Member
Joined:
Jun 2022
Posts:
11418
EE: 100% (31)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By Curmudgeon762: Same. And also to not have had the chance to jump a 17 Originally Posted By Curmudgeon762: Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I'm so old that I jumped out of C-141s... Same. And also to not have had the chance to jump a 17 |
I live in the country because monsters are attracted to cities.
Ego is the anesthesia that deadens stupidity.
Ego is the anesthesia that deadens stupidity.
|
Originally Posted By shooter_gregg: I was medevaced from the Philippines in a 141. Originally Posted By shooter_gregg: Originally Posted By Curmudgeon762: Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I'm so old that I jumped out of C-141s... Same. And also to not have had the chance to jump a 17 I was transported on a litter, on the bottom of the stack. Friggin deck radiated coldness. I have never been so cold in my life. Did they give you a toe tag 'just in case' too? |
|
Originally Posted By ar154all: I was transported on a litter, on the bottom of the stack. Friggin deck radiated coldness. I have never been so cold in my life. Did they give you a toe tag 'just in case' too? Originally Posted By ar154all: Originally Posted By shooter_gregg: Originally Posted By Curmudgeon762: Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I'm so old that I jumped out of C-141s... Same. And also to not have had the chance to jump a 17 I was transported on a litter, on the bottom of the stack. Friggin deck radiated coldness. I have never been so cold in my life. Did they give you a toe tag 'just in case' too? |
I live in the country because monsters are attracted to cities.
Ego is the anesthesia that deadens stupidity.
Ego is the anesthesia that deadens stupidity.
|
Originally Posted By wildearp: I drove by AMARG daily while they shredded every 141. Every one of them. I would suspect that there are no more of them. If you crack open a can of beer, you may be tasting some 141. There are still chopped up B52s laying on that storage yard, but I can't see any more 141s. Some of them were towed off base, just a few yards off site, where contractors or metal buyers shredded them and hauled them off to scrap. Are there any left that can fly? Let the arfcoms know. Originally Posted By wildearp: Originally Posted By FantasticPlastic: 80% of the 141s had cracks in the main wing spar. That should be sufficient to explain why I prefer the C-17. The 141s are mothballed. If a serious war arises, the plan is to fly them until their wings fall off, no shit. Are there any left that can fly? Let the arfcoms know. Aircraft aluminum is toxic to humans, used mostly for automotive applications, thanks to heavy metals used in the alloys. |
|
Originally Posted By MattyMattel: Aircraft aluminum is toxic to humans, used mostly for automotive applications, thanks to heavy metals used in the alloys. 6061, 5052, and 2024 alloys contain about 0.1% chromium. 7075 alloy contains no chromium. I didn't check 2124, 7175, or 7050, the other most common aluminum in airplanes. Chromium is the only heavy metal used. I am always impressed by the cargo handling facilities in the C-17. Everything needed is stowed and available. When we were preparing to ship Bird of Prey I was involved in laying out the payload in a C-17. Later the airplane was retasked to go to Bosnia and a C-5 was assigned. I was surprised that the cargo bay cross section in the C-17 is slightly larger, probably not enough to be noticed with a casual look. The C-17 load used every cubic inch, moving that stuff into the C-5 was simple, we had enough space to shove the stuff wherever the load masters wanted. The main input i imposed was the locations of the tie down chains on the BoP. The tie downs have slightly different patterns in those two airplanes. |
Keep your powder dry, and watch your back trail.
I'm watching my back trail.
I'm watching my back trail.
|
Originally Posted By GlockPride: And then there is this: www.twz.com/air/boeing-in-talks-to-restart-c-17-production Originally Posted By GlockPride: Originally Posted By NotIssued: Not to make you feel old, but the LAST contracted C-17 was delivered to Charleston (same as the first one) in 2013. And then there is this: www.twz.com/air/boeing-in-talks-to-restart-c-17-production Remembering when Boeing was beating the bushes to find buyers for the last 10 or so production aircraft. Then they completely shut the manufacturing facility. Would be a major challenge to try and restart somewhere new. |
|
Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I'm so old that I jumped out of C-141s... I'm somewhere in the double digits with 141 jumps. Did my first night hang in a 141 too.
|
Peace has always been the reign of mediocrities, and pacifism the bleating of a herd of sheep which allow themselves to be led to the slaughterhouse without defending themselves. ~some dead French guy.
|
Originally Posted By Curmudgeon762: Same. And also to not have had the chance to jump a 17 Originally Posted By Curmudgeon762: Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I'm so old that I jumped out of C-141s... Same. And also to not have had the chance to jump a 17 Vastly superior in all ways. Unless you have snowshoes under the top flap of your ruck and you're trying to trace the bottom of the door. Then it gets tricky. 
|
Peace has always been the reign of mediocrities, and pacifism the bleating of a herd of sheep which allow themselves to be led to the slaughterhouse without defending themselves. ~some dead French guy.
|
I forgot to add: The DC-3, C-130, and C-17 are the premier freighters ever built anywhere on the planet. It's too bad there will never be C-17's in widespread civilian use except maybe as fire fighters. Two other airplanes that look cool: C-124  C-133:  Unfortunately the C-133 was a marginally successful airplane and some pilots considered it to be dangerous. Retired in 1971 to make way for the C-5, but I think that was an excuse to get it out of service. |
Keep your powder dry, and watch your back trail.
I'm watching my back trail.
I'm watching my back trail.
601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601
Joined:
Aug 2003
Posts:
94641
EE: 100% (42)
WA, USA
|
Originally Posted By FantasticPlastic: The 141s are mothballed. If a serious war arises, the plan is to fly them until their wings fall off, no shit. Mothballed? All of them were cut up and sold for scrap. They don't even have a C-141 on Celebrity Row for display. |
Grab a fence post, hold it tight, womp your partner with all your might, hit him in the shin, hit him in the head, hit him again the critter ain't dead!
|
I flew the little ugly duckling that could... Combat payload was 3000 pounds of cargo and 3000 pounds of gas. We got every drop of performance out of those two Pratts as we could. Attached File Attached File |
"I will leave when I have your wounded." MAJ Kelly
601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601 601
Joined:
Aug 2003
Posts:
94642
EE: 100% (42)
WA, USA
|
Originally Posted By ar154all: It's been 30+ years since I was on a Starlifter. The 17 was concept drawings in Airman magazine at that time. Seriously; why is the 17 better than the 141? First and foremost, the C-141 was really nothing more than a jet powered C-130 as far as the fuselage and cargo dimensions go. A C-130H can carry 5 fully loaded pallets on the deck and one half-loaded pallet on the ramp. Single file. The C-141 can carry 13 pallets of cargo on the deck. Single file. The C-17 can carry 16 pallets of cargo on the deck and 2 pallets on the ramp. Double row. The C-17 can also carry one Mia Abrams tank while the C-141 could not. Those are the best reasons for the C-17 vice a C-141. |
Grab a fence post, hold it tight, womp your partner with all your might, hit him in the shin, hit him in the head, hit him again the critter ain't dead!
And the C5 can carry 2x M1 Abrams, which is nuts. Unfortunately, AFAIK, they can't be air dropped. This video of a C5 dropping 4x M551 Sheridan tanks is kinda amazing... 4 x M551 Sheridan Light Tanks LVAD C-5B Paradrop |
|
Originally Posted By FantasticPlastic: 80% of the 141s had cracks in the main wing spar. That should be sufficient to explain why I prefer the C-17. The 141s are mothballed. If a serious war arises, the plan is to fly them until their wings fall off, no shit. I thought they were all razor blades by now. Not sure how viable that plan is if they are not. The last ones were retired in 2006. Most of the aircrew that flew them are long retired. Let alone anyone that was an IP. |
“Firearm springs sometimes are made to be air soluble.” CSM Woods
|
Originally Posted By AeroE: I forgot to add: The DC-3, C-130, and C-17 are the premier freighters ever built anywhere on the planet. It's too bad there will never be C-17's in widespread civilian use except maybe as fire fighters. Two of those three were McDonnell-Douglas designed and built. GD likes to blame all of Boeing's woes on M-D, but M-D built some outstanding platforms right up until the end. |
|
Originally Posted By Teamer: I thought they were all razor blades by now. Not sure how viable that plan is if they are not. The last ones were retired in 2006. Most of the aircrew that flew them are long retired. Let alone anyone that was an IP. Originally Posted By Teamer: Originally Posted By FantasticPlastic: 80% of the 141s had cracks in the main wing spar. That should be sufficient to explain why I prefer the C-17. The 141s are mothballed. If a serious war arises, the plan is to fly them until their wings fall off, no shit. I thought they were all razor blades by now. Not sure how viable that plan is if they are not. The last ones were retired in 2006. Most of the aircrew that flew them are long retired. Let alone anyone that was an IP. The only -141's that are left are on static display. Even the NASA bird has been scrapped. |
|
Originally Posted By Sinister: My first C17 combat ride was to get into Baghdad International -- a steep night blacked-out turning descent from 12,000 feet. I've been in a combat approach in a C-17 into Afghanistan. Been lucky to do some stuff as a civilian 
|
"I may crossdress but I don't dress like a whore" - LittlePony
"I don't mind some dong" - Rustynutzz
"I don't mind some dong" - Rustynutzz
| The last few years of the operational use of the C-141 also involved altitude and speed restrictions due to structural failures around the windshield. That's on top of the wing & wing box cracks and the old as heck engines. The C-17 couldn't come online fast enough. |
| Last time I flew in a C-141 I was in the back with the cargo bay filled with double stacked B-61s. Took off from Barber's Point, refueled over Guam (I sat in the IP seat for that part), and landed somewhere far to the west of Guam. |
an event "of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
|
Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I flew the little ugly duckling that could... Combat payload was 3000 pounds of cargo and 3000 pounds of gas. We got every drop of performance out of those two Pratts as we could. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/432675/Boxcars_JPG-3608016.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/432675/C23RAMP_JPG-3608019.JPG I have an old friend who flew both versions of the Shorts for AirWisconsin. He actually liked the twin tail version in crosswinds much better, said it was easier to keep it straight on windy days. My guess is the Army version was a pretty nice flying airplane. |
Dave Funk
Past President and now a Board of Directors member Iowa Firearms Coalition.
Past President and now a Board of Directors member Iowa Firearms Coalition.
|
Originally Posted By F224: I have an old friend who flew both versions of the Shorts for AirWisconsin. He actually liked the twin tail version in crosswinds much better, said it was easier to keep it straight on windy days. My guess is the Army version was a pretty nice flying airplane. I don't know if I would say the Shorts is a nice flying airplane, but it got the job done. It was all we had so, we squeezed her for all she was worth... Attached File |
"I will leave when I have your wounded." MAJ Kelly
|
Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: I don't know if I would say the Shorts is a nice flying airplane, but it got the job done. It was all we had so, we squeezed her for all she was worth... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/432675/IMG_0472_jpeg-3671868.JPG Looks like night airdrop time! A good friend of mine stood up the contractor program in Afghanistan years ago. They were flying CASA's and something else I can't remember, Ed loved it! |
Dave Funk
Past President and now a Board of Directors member Iowa Firearms Coalition.
Past President and now a Board of Directors member Iowa Firearms Coalition.
|
Originally Posted By F224: Looks like night airdrop time! A good friend of mine stood up the contractor program in Afghanistan years ago. They were flying CASA's and something else I can't remember, Ed loved it! We had a contract CASA at JSOTF-P. It was ok but we would have been better served with another fulltime Bell 214. |
an event "of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
|
Originally Posted By F224: Looks like night airdrop time! A good friend of mine stood up the contractor program in Afghanistan years ago. They were flying CASA's and something else I can't remember, Ed loved it! My unit was the first in Army history to fly NVGs in combat with fixed wing aircraft. We were getting hit pretty hard during the day flying around at 100 AGL. Attached File Attached File Attached File |
"I will leave when I have your wounded." MAJ Kelly
|
Originally Posted By Brundoggie: We had a contract CASA at JSOTF-P. It was ok but we would have been better served with another fulltime Bell 214. Originally Posted By Brundoggie: Originally Posted By F224: Looks like night airdrop time! A good friend of mine stood up the contractor program in Afghanistan years ago. They were flying CASA's and something else I can't remember, Ed loved it! We had a contract CASA at JSOTF-P. It was ok but we would have been better served with another fulltime Bell 214. I knew the guy that owned the CASA's. I'd do airdrops out of them when I tested parachutes for a parachute company. |
|
Originally Posted By VACaver: I knew the guy that owned the CASA's. I'd do airdrops out of them when I tested parachutes for a parachute company. Originally Posted By VACaver: Originally Posted By Brundoggie: Originally Posted By F224: Looks like night airdrop time! A good friend of mine stood up the contractor program in Afghanistan years ago. They were flying CASA's and something else I can't remember, Ed loved it! We had a contract CASA at JSOTF-P. It was ok but we would have been better served with another fulltime Bell 214. I knew the guy that owned the CASA's. I'd do airdrops out of them when I tested parachutes for a parachute company. Ours was contracted through Evergreen, just like our choppers. |
an event "of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,"
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
567
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By TimeOnTarget: My unit was the first in Army history to fly NVGs in combat with fixed wing aircraft. We were getting hit pretty hard during the day flying around at 100 AGL. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/432675/CIMG0441_JPG-3672158.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/432675/CIMG0444_JPG-3672159.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/432675/CIMG0662_jpeg-3672160.JPG Damn dude. I assume newer stuff has a NV mode or are they still taping everything
|
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: Damn dude. I assume newer stuff has a NV mode or are they still taping everything |
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: Damn dude. I assume newer stuff has a NV mode or are they still taping everything That was temporary until we modified all the aircraft with NVG compatible lighting. Our contract maintenance people did all the work at the Thunderdome. Attached File |
"I will leave when I have your wounded." MAJ Kelly