In one short article they call it a tanker plane, a cargo plane, and a transport plane.
This is two major plane crashes in a week.
No money for military maintenance?
Plenty for illegals.
Give our leaders time to tell us what to believe. Do not look at any pictures or videos until our overlords release the ones we should see.
Who was conveniently on this plane that didnt survive?
Ron Brown BUMP.
Isn’t this the second one in two days?
Benghazi manpads?
Carrying a cargo of fuel. Tight security over there? How convenient/easy would it be for someone to sneak an explosive on board before take off?
That’s because the KC-135 is all three. It has extra fuel tanks in the fuselage to transfer fuel, it has a large open fuselage inside to haul cargo, and it can have seats installed (or you can ride the horrible benches in it) to act as a transport.
There is a Russian installation within 100 miles, I believe. The USAF guys I'd work with would tell me of occasional fly-bys of Russian fighters. Not much to do about it other than monitor and send up your own to say hello. The area is quite volatile, and our welcomed presence there is the result of money. Nobody I spoke to seems to have any illusions about the place.
I know of a few civilian airliner crew members who've been roughed up and/or robbed while overnighting in Bishkek. The local officials there are not to be trusted, and armed escorts have been necessary at times. Aviation accidents happen. The one at Bagram this week was clearly a catastrophic shift of cargo at takeoff. But as others have said, losing a plane in Kyrgyzstan is inherently suspicious for many reasons.
Northrop Grumman/EADS had the contract won and was ready to build new tankers several years ago replacing the ancient tankers we have now.
Then along came the Boeing propaganda, and now the blood of US servicemen.