Originally Posted by
Just This Once...
So now you are repeating what I wrote back at me? You do realise that means you are battling against yourself, again?
You really struggle with facts; I get that. You don't like source material; I get that too. You like to challenge people by asserting something you have no idea about; I also get that.
But why do it in public?
I don't get that.
Wow. Some of you not only take this stuff seriously, but really quite personally. Very well. A few comments:
1. Struggle with facts? Don't like source material? I have no idea if the data you presented was "source material" but as soon as you presented it I a) acknowldeged it, and b) accepted it at face value. I don't understand how that constitutes a "struggle" or "not liking it." Maybe this is a Brit thing, and I'm not a Brit so just "don't get it."
2. Challenge people? Sorry, no. I did challenge the oft repeated implications that:
a) the final USAF tanker RFP was the same as the first
b) the final RFP was for an off the shelf tanker with little or no development
c) the offerors/manufacturers had the power to tell USAF that their stated requirements "weren't needed"
d) that the US taxpayers are burdened with an over budget tanker program
e) that Boeing in some unexplained fashion "stole" the tanker program from Airbus
f) that either tanker is "superior" to the other. In fact they are quite different and satisfy a different set of requirements that the customer must decide best suits their needs. USAF's needs just happen to be better served by KC-46.
g) KC-46 is not any more survivable in hostile airspace than any other airliner based tanker, including the legacy tankers
If challenging these oft repeated false notions is "challenging people", then guilty as charged. But in America we view that quite differently.
3. Concerning this statement of mine which you bolded and therefore presume you have a problem with:
can you fully fill the airplane [A330MRTT] with just gas? The KC-46 can. According to this guy, the A330MRTT cannot.
Your "source material" does not answer this question. So, is Beagle right and the MRTT will reach its MTOW with full fuel and no cargo, or is Just This Once right and the MRTT with full fuel can still accept 10t of cargo? I personally believe it's the latter and said so right in this thread years ago. What say your "source material?"
4. "Why do it in public?" First off I don't "Do it in public" And secondly, I post here mostly for its entertainment value. I do take people's postings seriously, but I don't take them personally. That would ruin the point of it all.