Originally Posted by
TwoStep
Can a KC-46 get airborne with a full load of fuel from a 9,000 foot runway? I'd question that.
"What part of
mandatory requirement don't you understand"...
In short, yes, the KC-46 has demonstrated the ability to take off fully loaded from an
8,000 ft. on a plus 15 deg C day. That was one of the requirements. As was main deck cargo (with an automated handling system), provisions for future 'features' that we were not allowed to ask about, and a whole laundry list of other stuff.
You may not have noticed, but the basic KC-135 airframe has been used for a number of non-tanking applications over the last 60 years (e.g. electronic surveillance). It's a pretty good bet that the KC-46 will get similar treatment - and I'm sure a lot of that extra 25 miles of wiring is provisional for future applications. I spent a lot of time on and around several of the KC-46 aircraft - and there are numerous features both inside and outside that are not on any other 767. I can't even guess as to what some of them are for (and if I could I wouldn't be able to talk about it - I had to take training and sign a non-disclosure before I was even allowed on the aircraft). All stuff that would have needed to be developed an integrated into the MRTT at considerable time and cost.
Now, I'm not saying Boeing didn't make some mighty foul ups that resulted in large cost and time over runs - things like fuel manifolds that couldn't hold fuel and the well known wiring errors. Maybe Airbus would have avoided making those sorts of major mistakes. Then again, maybe not - the A400M has hardly been a shinning example of good program management - nor was the A380.
I think what Asturias56 wrote is pretty close to the mark - there were several mandatory requirements that simply didn't make sense when applied to a aircraft derived from a commercial airliner. But even the mention to the USAF that a requirement didn't make sense was immediately shutdown with the 'what part of mandatory don't you understand'.