Red Flag Shut Down By Tanker Shortage

The Strategy Page ^ | 11/12/2010 | The Strategy Page

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

The U.S. Air Force recently had to cancel ones of its Red Flag training exercises because there were not enough tankers available. The air force holds 4-5 of these exercises a year, to maintain fighter pilot skills, and sometimes to complete the training of pilots before they go overseas. The training includes aerial refueling. The problem here is that the air force fleet of KC-135 tankers are very old. An unpredictable, and growing, number of them are unavailable because of maintenance problems. Earlier this year, the air force disclosed that, on average, 20 percent of its 415 aging KC-135 tankers are in the shop for long term maintenance. Last year alone, these aircraft (plus 59 larger and less elderly KC-10s) transferred some 455,000 tons of fuel in 82,000 refueling operations (5.4 tons per transfer). This has been a strain on these aging aircraft. In the last four years, a quarter of these aircraft have been grounded just because of age-related issues, and the number of these cases is growing. Maintainers are not only worked hard, but have to keep coming up with new solutions for unforeseen problems.

Not surprisingly, the air force asserts that, for some of the possible war scenarios (Korea, Taiwan/China), there would not be enough KC-135s to go around. This is largely because of the need to refuel navy aircraft. The navy can work around that, to a certain extent, by using U.S. Marine Corps KC-130 tankers and navy F-18 fighters equipped for the task. But this means the navy has fewer resources. The air force wants a new tanker, but has been unable to get it done

[QBFimi]

Ah, yes. The good old StratoBladder. Spent many a happy hour in ‘em - building flight time for the airlines. Sigh.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

There are some at Travis AFB and McGuire AFB. There are about 60 still in service

[Oztrich Boy]

Maybe the USAF should buy some new tankers?

[PapaBear3625]

Perhaps the Air Force should change its procurement methods to instead lease tankers from Boeing, 15 years plus option for yearly renewal. Boeing (or Airbus) would be responsible for any major maintenance, and could swap an old plane for a new one when maintenance on the old one was not worthwhile.

It takes FAR too much time and overhead for the military to purchase new capital equipment.

[Oztrich Boy]

Perhaps the Air Force should change its procurement methods to instead lease tankers from Boeing, 15 years plus option for yearly renewal.

What could possibly go wrong with that?

[Hulka]

Good suggestion, the lease.

Sadly, it was done but Sen McLame killed the lease.