Posted on 06/20/2024 2:30:32 PM PDT by hardspunned
One of the components of American strategic projection has been the world’s most prodigious and sophisticated aerial refueling fleet. There are currently approx 400+ KC-135s capable of refueling two receiver aircraft at the same time in the current USAF fleet. The first operational flight was 1956. The last KC-135 was delivered to the Air Force in 1965. Of the original KC-135As, more than 417 were modified with new CFM-56 engines produced by CFM-International. The newest KC-135 air-frame is 59 years old. Fifty nine years old. The retirement of the KC-135 has been anticipated and the replacement has been the disastrous KC-46A Pegasus Tanker Modernization Program which has had significant problems to include video control of the fuel boom difficulties and believe it or not, a refueling system that leaks fuel and the usual circus of missing deadlines so typical of DoD programs.
(Excerpt) Read more at libertarianinstitute.org ...
The KC-46A, like the KC-135, is a Boeing product.
Why didn’t they design and build something immediately functional that simply modernizes existing technology instead of using this effort as an expensive time delaying R&D program?
DoD could not organize a piss-up in a pub. More US failure.
Airbus had a better, viable option that Boeing fought and prevailed over.
This is what happens again and again when the bean-counters take over from the engineers.
It has killed and seriously damaged hundreds of companies, yet the MBAs continue their miserly carnage-inducing ways.
Boeing is only the latest high profile victim of the MBA programs in woke universities.
Many years ago my brother was on a MAC flight out of Fairbanks to Tinker AFB in OK.
He was coming from Seoul (Kimpo)
Bob, my brother was in the jump seat (eng). Somewhere over Oregon he noticed a red light blinking. He asked the pilot if everything was 5x5. Pilot said no problem.
Now they’re over NV and another red light comes on. This time with an alarm. Not good.
So my brother asked the pilot if everything was okay.
Pilot said no problem.
The KC 135 landed at Tinker with 2 engines
File this under wtf over.
5.56mm
One engine quit.
They were headed straight for the Acropolis.
Three engines were enough.
Other than preferring to remain alive, he said he didn't want to be remembered as the American pilot who destroyed the Acropolis.
We went back, created new criteria / changed it, and ensured Boeing got the contract worth >35 billion in 2011. Aren't we happy we did that? /sarc
https://www.defensedaily.com/northrop-grumman-wins-air-force-tanker-competition/business-financial/
You don't have competition anymore.
The competitors are broke / merged (example MD), and politicians (all of them on the take in some way) are making the decisions. So, you end up with stories like this.
I imagine had we gone with what an unbiased evaluative process decided is the best option, we would today already have a tanker: https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/kc30tanker/ Based on the A330 which is a common air-frame (>1,600 built) and which has been around for a while ~ 30 years since it's first model appeared. This plane already existed in a tanker variant used by allies a year before it won the original bid (very low risk): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330_MRTT
***But why opt for the cheap and low risk option, if you can take the high risk and more expensive option? / sarc
I have a PHD in Watching Aircraft Engineering Videos from the University of Youtube.
I can say quite authoritatively that there is the claim in just about every one that aircraft developed after WWII have the engineers placing at least two engines for exactly this very reason.
They claim that there are few repair garages up there.
Thank John McCain. The contract was originally awarded to the proven Airbus product, to be built in Alabama.
McCain didn’t get his cut, so Boeing got the contact. Over priced, very late, and it is still a Boeing…
“”The KC-46A, like the KC-135, is a Boeing product.””
So is AIR FORCE ONE!
“”They claim that there are few repair garages up there.””
https://aviationhumor.net/pilots-vs-maintenance-engineers/
A bit of humor - my favorite:
**Number 3 engine missing
**Engine found on right wing after brief search
Also, in order to comply with the "Buy American" law, Airbus was going to assemble all A-330 aircraft in Alabama. Boeing could not allow that.
My son flew the KC-135 for 10 years, now for UPS. At the time the AF pilots were excited to hear Boeing ‘won’ the contract. After that time they kept hearing of all the problems with the KC-46. His comment was the boom and control was made so complicated when the 135 had a simple system that worked again and again.
Might be a little agenda that goes with the article.
This bid was including Northrop Grumman as the American partner with Airbus.
Oh, and btw, the KC-135s are NOT capable of refueling two receiver aircraft at the same time. That a huge error in that article.
I worked with Air Force refueling pilots, and not a single one wanted to fly the KC-46. They see what’s happening, and they still prefer the KC-135. Their desire was for the airframe of the KC-135 to still be used, and the internals upgraded.
Bingo! That’s exactly what the AF refueling pilots wanted!
We have John McCain to thank for this mess.
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.