|
|
|
|
|
|
by dchristian
1248 days ago
|
|
|
I wondered if the C-17 would be a game changer for them. It was just entering service back in 92. They had the land landing strip back then, but it's too short for a C-5. The C-17 was designed to handle shorter and rougher landing strips than the C-5. The Antarctic Support Contract was a thing back then too. They did most of the day-day operations, while the Navy managed flights, supplies, the mess (cafeteria), and the like. I don't really know the division of responsibilities. Do you know if they are landing on winter flights, or just doing airdrops? The later is much easier to do. Even in the summer, the C-130s have to fly with enough fuel to return to NZ because there have been times when the winds become too high to land (and NZ is the "nearest" alternate runway). |
|
|
> Do you know if they are landing on winter flights, or just doing airdrops?
My understanding is that they have something like two windows over the winter, where they land flights. I presume C-17s, which don't usually need to take on fuel in McMurdo and are generally less hassle than the LC-130s.
I have been at Pole when they've done "practice" airdrops, but I don't think those have been a significant logistical channel since the very early days, and maybe setting up field camps.
There's a bulldozer way under the surface at Pole where its airdrop went awry. I can't remember the details but it's in Paul Siple's book "90 South" - something like the chutes didn't open, or lines got tangled, and it came to rest a couple dozen feet under the surface. Pole is in an accumulation zone though, so over time snow has built up above it. I believe it was only in the 2000s that it stopped being useful as a radar reference for landing planes.