Talk:Douglas C-133 Cargomaster
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Retired edit
I was at Travis Air Expo 2008 today and they retired a C-133. I don't know any more details, but I have photos if needed. PM me. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 04:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Critical Stress Corrosion? edit
This article claims that the above was a factor in the retirement of this aircraft. Really? Stress corrosion is usually associated with operation in a corrosive environment, like in a chemical plant. It's hard to believe that the C-133 operated in a particularly corrosive environment - probably just good ol' fashioned metal fatigue accelerated by vibration. Jmdeur (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Comparable aircraft edit
Shouldn't we include the Short Belfast here, it has a link in the opposite direction? I would do it myself but don't know how to.Kitbag (talk) 05:26, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Several of the aircraft listed are "not" comparable to the C-133, except they fly and can carry cargo. But no harm in letting them be. Jack--Jackehammond (talk) 04:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
.
Stall characteristics edit
Article mentions several craft being lost "possibly due to the unusual stall characteristics" of the aircraft. What was unusual about them? -- 145.228.61.5 (talk) 09:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC)