Posted on 05/14/2013 2:12:15 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Algerian Military Testing An A330 MRTT at Boufarik
(Source: Le Matin DZ; published May 13, 2013)
(Published in French; unofficial translation by defense-aerospace.com)
Just weeks after the C17 evaluation that took place in Boufarik and the air force test center at Tamanrasset, an Airbus A330 MRTT tanker landed last week at the main air transport base in Boufarik.
According to the “secret difa3” blog, the Algerian Air Force is in the process of finalizing a contract to acquire three A330 aircraft to reinforce its tanker and long-range transport fleet. Besides their ability to refuel in-flight fighter and attack aircraft, the A330 MRTT will also support the C17 transports which are currently being acquired.
It should be noted that the central refueling boom was not fitted to the aircraft that landed at Boufarik this afternoon. Only two refueling pods were mounted on its wingtips. The integration of the EADS tanker will be relatively easier because Algerian air force crews are already familiar with the aircraft, as the A330 MRTT tanker is similar to the A340 aircraft already in the air force’s VIP flight.
The A330 MRTT is a military variant of the A330-200 commercial aircraft. It can carry up to 270 troops, or 8 standard pallets, and 65 tonnes of fuel. It can refuel six heavy fighters on a 4,000-km flight.
With the acquisition of the C-17 Globemaster III and the A330 MRTT, the Algerian Air Force is moving into high gear for the renewal of its transport fleet, and this opens the door to speculation about the future replacement of its 16 C-130 Hercules transports, which are currently undergoing a thorough modernization in the United States.
EDITOR’S NOTE: In an earlier post, the same blog reported that a Boeing C-17 belonging to the US Air Force’s 446th Military Airlift Wing, based at McChord AFB, Washington state, flew to Algeria in April for a series of demonstrations, which included in-flight evaluations by Algerian pilots. The Algerian air force plans to shortly order six to eight C-17s, the report said without identifying its sources.)
-ends-
Is Algeria so rich it can afford to buy three C-17s?
Oh yeah, it has yet to leave Boeing's visual art department in anything more than a conceptual drawing.
Relax, in case of emergency US Air Force could rent about 14 tanker from http://www.airtanker.co.uk/. That’s about one-fourth of KC-10 capacity. Also another 5 are already available from Australia. Saudi Arabia or UAE may also supply some tanker aid.
What’s the problem with not having the latest tanker? The US tanker being late? Boeing said the program is on track. Last time I heard that the program was called 787. The F-35 is also late. So what?
I just remember from a few years ago the Air Force was screaming for a new tanker because they can’t slap any more bandaids on the 135 fleet, and the KC-10’s are aging fast too.
Then there was the lease 100 tankers from Boeing scandal....
Then they finally had a competition based on what the Air Force wanted in a tanker.... That got spiked after Boeing’s unions went to daddy barry, and various congress critters they carry around in their pocket crying foul because Northrup Grumman/EADS won.
Then they had a new competition with the requirements taylored in such a way that the NG/EADS jet was all but ruled out, thus giving Boeing the contract.
Boeing said that they had a viable design, ready for production and yet today it’s still “flying” around the art department.
IF the Air Force was allowed to follow through with Northrup Grumman, they’d already have a few in the fleet if not doing various flight testing by now.
Boeing never offered the 787 as a tanker to the Air Force, it was just a version of the 767-200LRF, with wings, gear, cargo door and floor off the 300F, flaps off the 400ER, uprated engines, and flight displays off the 787.
Don’t tell me. I read the public available information used to calculate fuel consumption. The flight profiles used to calculate the “fuel usage rates” had on average of 7 (seven) touch&go maneuvers per flight. On the other side US Air Force ordered also simulators to avoid training flights... These faked profiles made up the price difference.
On the other side nobody looked at the money that could have been saved be returning 50 KC-135 earlier by using 20 rather simple Australian KC-30 type for the first batch and include afterwards more sophisticated installations like crew protection, LAIRCM, main cargo bay, ... later.
I guess Airbus is no better of to sell A330 to airlines for delayed 787. Will we see another roll-out with temporary fasteners for KC-46?
Btw. KC-30 will be soon certified to refuel F/A-18 of all Forces: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/australian-a330-mrtt-undergoes-tanking-trials-with-fa-18fs-384998/
I didn’t get why the F-35 needs boom refueling. The refueling rate for fighter aircraft isn’t much better for boom compared to probe-and-drogue but 2 aircraft can refueled at once with probe-and-drogue.
Now US Air Force gets second best aircraft later and untested. The Chicago boys made it...
IIRC, there was a drouge set up for three aircraft at one time.
I think it was the Brits with their VC-10 or Victor tankers.
The new British AirTanker has also three drogues. The “Voyager” is already used for transport while first refueling operations already took place: http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_05_20_2013_p0-580613.xml
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.