quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:
Yeah...if my boss saw me dick up and do something like that, the resultant meeting would look more like the "counseling session" Maverick got at the beginning of Top Gun.

This made me laugh...LOUD! Because we know it's true...

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
Well what I heard was it was NOT an Air Force pilot. Rumor has it that a USAF Transport Pilot would not risk spilling the cocktail drinks and getting the golf clubs in disarray.

(Joke )

You never flew on a C-130, did you?

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:

quote:

Originally posted by GT-40DOC:

quote:

Originally posted by SBrooks:
Was the old boom and vision system acceptable (on old tanker fleet) ?

It certainly worked for the F-4s in
Vietnam.....night after night!!

Yep, but back then the boom operator simply looked out the window and the receiver pilot just followed the direction of a few lightbulbs on the bottom of the tanker.

Something tells me that this new tankers vision system is a bit more complex than a window and a few lightbulbs.

Oh My!

Curiosity got the best of me and I searched to see what this new vision system was, Oh my!



I prefer the old KC-135 visual system.
Lay down and look out the window.

quote:

Originally posted by Herkdriver:

You never flew on a C-130, did you?

I recall a fairly firm touchdown in a C-130A in which the chart carrier by the stairs got ripped off the cabinet. It was uncomfortable. Then again, we tended to throw the C-130 around like a supercub.

Unlike the 767, of course, the C-130 was considered for carrier use.

quote:

I prefer the old KC-135 visual system.
Lay down and look out the window.

Yeah, a lot of the trouble with the KC-46 seems to be they removed a simple window for the boom operator and are trying to replace it with a millions dollar 'virtual' display.

I mean, what the heck was sooooo deficient with the previous arrangement that worked for decades? I guess somebody in the USAF or Boeing thought it would be 'cool' to have a 'high tech' solution to a problem that never existed in the first place. So, surprise, surprise, it doesn't work as good as the low tech "look out the window" approach, and now they are millions over budget and years behind schedule.

This crap is so predictable.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Navy system is far easier, just reel out the hose and basket, we'll do the rest.

I agree - Navy/Marine system is MUCH easier to use. I think the needs of the receiver makes the motivation to plug correctly that much greater. I'd much rather have my fate in my own hands than hope the boom driver is good enough complete the plug.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Navy system is far easier, just reel out the hose and basket, we'll do the rest.

But we know the USAF pilots like being 'plugged' instead of 'plugging'.

Next thing you’ll break out in song:

“I don’t know but it’s been said, Air Force wings are made of lead.
I don’t know but I’ve been told, Navy wings are made of gold.”

quote:

Originally posted by SBrooks:
Was the old boom and vision system acceptable (on old tanker fleet) ?

If so, why the redo ?

Because engineers, by their very nature, are totally incapable of not screwing with things. They can’t resist they urge to make something, anything, “better”. Better often means fully buzzword compliant, using the latest and greatest bleeding edge technologies and/or methods.

ETA: “Better” often (but not always) isn’t. There truly is something to the old saw, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

(Written by one who played that game in a prior life.)

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Navy system is far easier, just reel out the hose and basket, we'll do the rest.

But we know the USAF pilots like being 'plugged' instead of 'plugging'.

Next thing you’ll break out in song:

“I don’t know but it’s been said, Air Force wings are made of lead.
I don’t know but I’ve been told, Navy wings are made of gold.”

Nah, everyone knows that's true.

Did I ever tell you about the time a KC135 had to go 'off station' with 30K of give because of the "boomers crew day".

This was with two nearly empty baby F-18s behind them with about 15 mins of flight time left in them, overhead Afghanistan, late Oct 2001. No other tankers in southern Afghanistan due to some fallouts. We were the last receiver they willingly gave gas to (F-14), but the Sqnd CO was flying the lead Navy F18 with a nugget on his wing. He said something to the effect of, "if we flame out because you guys won't slow down and drop the boom, I won't be the only ones going down". That was after trying the soft sell.

They slowed down and gave them enough gas to get to get back to the ship.

Certainly wasn't the 126th ARW IL Guard unit.

One of the great things about the KC-135 boom operators in Vietnam(besides being excellent at their job), they usually had the latest issue of Playboy and they would put the center fold in the window for us to see.....it did put a smile on our face!!

^^^

Ahhh yes...

The Boom Boom Operators!

Found out today it was the USAF SQ commander flying that landing. Yikes!

quote:

You never flew on a C-130, did you?

I flew a few times with the NH Air Guard on C130s. The pilots were very professional and proficient. We flew over Mt. Washington so low, I could see the hiker's faces. They also practiced radar evasion take-offs and landings. I swear, 50 yds was their ultimate goal for either. LOL

I love busting USAF's ballz, but I have nothing but love for the tankers & boomers. We couldn't have kicked the Taliban's ass without them!

Traded emails once with a KC-135 boomer and we traded photos of the event.

I think that guy was the pilot on my last commercial flight

Looked like a good landing with a fairly heavily loaded plane.

That is my non aviation background opinion.

A Navy pilot would have buzzed the tower first!

Since someone mentioned F4's... Here are a few refueling and a nice role.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVHXv1lPxG4

https://www.upi.com/Defense-Ne...elers/5631560859425/

KC-46 fix months away as more debris found in new refuelers

The Air Force says new quality control measures and production changes have been put in place, but they expect to continue to find debris in new aircraft for the foreseeable future because of "a cultural issue."

By Allen Cone
June 18, 2019

(UPI) -- As the U.S. Air Force continues to find foreign objects in its new KC-46A Pegasus in-flight refueling tankers, a "fix" is months away, the branch's acquisition leader said.

Tools, rubbish and left-over parts, including loose nuts, are still being discovered since Boeing first delivered the refuelers in January and revamped its inspection process.

"It's a cultural issue," Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics, told reporters Monday at the Paris Air Show in Le Bourget. "We are having those cultural dialogues with Boeing. This is not something you fix by sending out a memo, and then there's no foreign object debris in the airplanes."

Though Roper said at the briefing that he is "happy with Boeing's leadership and their response to FOD," he acknowledged the debris issue is likely to stick around for months or longer "because culture does not fix easy."

As Roper spoke, Boeing parked a gray KC-46 on the flight line nearby.

When the first debris was found in February, the Air Force stopped accepting the planes from Boeing until its inspection process was changed. Deliveries resumed in March but were halted again when inspectors found more debris.

Roper said the Air Force is accepting "one and change" KC-46s per month instead of the preferred three monthly. So far, Boeing has delivered 11 of the aircraft this year.

"Boeing is focused on providing quality KC-46 aircraft to our air force customer, and remain committed to our goal of 36 deliveries by the end of the year," Boeing said.

Roper said the inspection process is tedious and time consuming, with each airframe inspected from "tip to tail," with the inspection restarted every time something is found until the plane is clean.

Even before they arrive at Air Force bases, foreign objects have been found inside dozens of tankers in various states of assembly at Boeing's plant in Everett, Wash.

"We expect all of them are going to have foreign object debris," or FOD, Roper said. "As we go through and we're doing sweeps, we're finding FOD in the planes."

This is "unacceptable," Leanne Caret, the CEO of Boeing Defense, Space and Security, said Monday. "Our customers deserve better than that. I have personally apologized to our customers and I have given them my personal assurances ... in every aspect of our business, this will not happen again."

Company executives are examining the inspection process of other projects, as well.

Boeing CFO Greg Smith the company has been focused on figuring out what the company needs to do to fix the FOD problem, but Roper said he expects more KC-46s with debris in them for the time being.

"As those airplanes flow forward down the line, we think it's going to take some time for the new quality assurance inspection processes to start early enough so that airplanes will flow that are FOD-free," he said. "It's not the way we want to get airplanes into the Air Force, but it's what we're going to have to do in the meantime."

He added that the process won't be sped up because pushing for a faster delivery schedule "would put the rigor of the inspection at risk. We're just going to have to stay focused."

The KC-46 is built as an empty 767 airframe in Everett, Wash., then transferred to a facility at the south end of Paine Field called the Military Delivery Center. That's where the aircraft's military systems, including the refueling and communications equipment, are installed.

Although the plane has had inspection problems, Boeing officials said it is a safe plane and weren't embarrassed to bring one to Paris.

"KC-46 is a great capability," acting Air Force Secretary Matt Donovan said Monday. "It really is a great airplane. What we're talking about here are sort of minor things when you take a look at the whole capability of the airplane."

The KC-46 is not Boeing's only headache right now, as it has also been dealing with the global grounding of the 737 Max, which is believed to have faulty flight control software responsible for two crashes that killed 346 people.

The 737 Max and KC46 are manufactured in different factories in the Seattle area.

Is the jet flown from Boeing to somewhere else where it is "accepted" by the Air Force ? Or does the AF go pick them up at Boeing ?

I would think that there's some percentage of nuts or items that might shake loose during the first flight or two...