PDA

View Full Version : RAF C-17 - Inflight refueling


tspark
11th Mar 2005, 18:25
Now that the RAF are going to buy their C-17s, any mention of them being converted to probe/drogue refueling?

rivetjoint
11th Mar 2005, 18:29
Funny post, made me chuckle, they're not even allowed to get gas off a boom are they?

16 blades
11th Mar 2005, 19:10
You'd need a bloody big tanker......

16B

mystic_meg
11th Mar 2005, 19:46
....Gazing into my crystal ball, I think that you will find that with the ER tanks (as fitted to the RAF jets) AAR just simply isn't needed....:ok:

SirToppamHat
11th Mar 2005, 20:28
With the ER tanks providing such a lot of fuel, what are the chances of fitting something like the MPRS used on a KC135, to give a C17 (KC17?) a refuelling capability as a tanker?

I know nothing about this so please bare with me as I am just 'thinking aloud' in response to the thread so far.

STH

I'll get me coat.

D-IFF_ident
11th Mar 2005, 20:32
Looks easy enough:

http://www.kstope.ang.af.mil/webgallery/pages/C17.htm

rivetjoint
11th Mar 2005, 20:50
Does the C-17 have the plumbing in the wings to get the fuel there and drive the mprs fueldryaulics?

US Herk
11th Mar 2005, 22:45
Looks easy enough

Having done both types (boom & probe/drogue), I can tell you it looks easier than it is.

Poking a hi-speed drogue in Albert at night can be a bit challenging, but once stuck is quite easy to stay on.

Conversely, getting prodded in the head with a stiff boom is relatively easy, but staying there can be a challenge - especially in a power challenged Hercules.

Courses for horses, really...:ok:

scroggs
13th Mar 2005, 07:31
Poking a hi-speed drogue in Albert at night can be a bit challenging, but once stuck is quite easy to stay on.

Challenging? Challenging?? I obviously didn't teach you - or if I did, you didn't remember what you learned!! Refuelling in Albert is the sport of kings; a wonderful way to exercise one's (hopefully) superior flying skills! ;)

lineslime
13th Mar 2005, 08:32
Just remember if you miss the basket with albert and hit the HF aerials the poor fairies have to replace said item. Looks straight forward, but it confuses them as it isn't a black box to swap over. It takes them a long time to master the skill of box out box in.
Forgive my ramblings as it was a long night and the breakfast beer is starting to work.

sycamore
13th Mar 2005, 09:17
USHerk, and Scroggs,
for a quick refresher, go to` Rotorheads- Gallery, p20,` possibly prodding `old BEagle`........!! :ok:

BEagle
13th Mar 2005, 13:32
Very probably.....

Possibly the most frustrating part of all AAR work was trying to get the VC10K Mk 17 HDU set up correctly for the C-130.

We might get it to trail, but as soon as the Herc made contact, the blasted hose would often runaway in...red light on...clear Herc to echelon. Clear the Air Eng to wind it and trail it again, then try again... And again....

The low speed drogue procedure worked OK, but for the old '10 to have to fly around at the heights and speeds needed for so long must have fatigued the old things awfully - and it guzzled fuel in the 20 flap/slat out configuration.

One year we seemed to be doing rather a lot of C-130 prodding; the boss decided to make a thing of it so, like good troops, we let him make himself look rather stupid when he asked why the 10 Sqn AAR crews were only getting FJ trade.....

As one SNCO then said to him, "Perhaps it's because their C1Ks don't have centerline hoses, sir?"

US Herk
13th Mar 2005, 20:13
Challenging? Challenging?? I obviously didn't teach you - or if I did, you didn't remember what you learned!! Refuelling in Albert is the sport of kings; a wonderful way to exercise one's (hopefully) superior flying skills!

Oh it was quite fun, no doubt - but it's all relative. I was comparing it to boom refueling...

Nopax,thanx
14th Mar 2005, 12:48
I'm reminded of Robert Prest's remark in his F-4 book that IFR onto a drogue was like taking a running f:mad: at a rolling donut!

D-IFF_ident
14th Mar 2005, 17:48
Thanks for the tips. From what I've heard, if you don't move the control column, the aircraft doesn't move either ;)

I may not be a pro at the AAR game but it seems to me that the boom would be easier because you don't have to stay on it so long.

:cool:

Banggearo
14th Mar 2005, 18:43
Yeh but I guess it's all relative, if your looking for 100,000lbs of gas in a C-17 you are still stuck there for 20 minutes which certainly makes your eyes water!!:ooh:

L J R
14th Mar 2005, 18:48
Having done both (Boom & Drogue). The Boom offers a much quicker flow rate.
Lights on Boom system make life easier when you get in. A KC-10 has so much power in its Boom that it can actually re-position you if you are out of position!

Basket can be a handful to get into. But are always good for a laugh.

BDA is rediculous Full Stop!
Wing Pods on KC-135 are tricky - especially if you are on the left!
Centreline on KC-10 is too flimsy

VC-10 is simply the best Drogue - But I wish it has a boom.



Despite having a huge fuel load, sometimes AAR is essential if you need a small fuel load to cater for a short take-off run and AAR after airborne to go the extra mile, or if your load has a tricky C of G that you need full or strangely balanced fuel to even remain within C of G. - & I'm not just talking about Transport Aircraft!
.


thanks mystic....

mystic_meg
14th Mar 2005, 18:52
or if your load is so out of C of G that you need full fuel to even fly

...ermm.. if your load is so out of C of G you ain't even gonna get airborne mate!;)

sonicstomp
14th Mar 2005, 19:39
Doing both types (boom & basket) fairly regularly, IMHO boom is harder.

Basket is a bit of a joust but once you are in, your flying can afford to be a lot less precise (the basket can be dragged around a fair bit, the boom envelope is fairly tight).

However, its horses-for-courses.....this p.m I got lucky first time with the basket so big grins!! (thanks Fagin!!)

NURSE
16th Mar 2005, 10:06
but will the next AAR aircraft gets have a Boom so it can support the USAF as well?

hairyclameater
16th Mar 2005, 13:44
Poking a hi-speed drogue in Albert at night can be a bit challenging, but once stuck is quite easy to stay on.

Conversely, getting prodded in the head with a stiff boom is relatively easy, but staying there can be a challenge

:ooh: carry on film double entendre overload..

On a related note - are those lovely big round globes (ooh err, not again) gonna be flown LL?? They are tactical after all arent they?

L J R
16th Mar 2005, 20:18
HCE,

They do LL twice per sortie (mostly) 1: Take-off 2: Land.


At least that is what you can tell the icecream licking public.