Vascodegama ...
Sorry, muppetry acknowledged, not intended.
Yes, I did indeed mean to compare the under-wing hose units on the VC10 with those on the KC135.
Notwithstanding the previous confusion, during a visit a few months ago to Mildenhall, the crew hosting us were quite specific that the number of sets available at the Unit was limited. Perhaps it was their use of phraseology that created the confusion in my mind, but the implication was that there were more airframes able to take the pods themselves than there were pods. Moreover, the pods themselves were 'removable' (no small task I know), so that for extended periods where the additional capability was not required, the airframes could operate without the drag which the pods must create.
Back to the original question: I know that one of the reasons the MPRS was developed was to allow the KC-135 to support USN ac types, and an old Boeing press release:
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/...e.970120a.html
indicated that the intention was additionally to provide the capability for other NATO ac. What I want to know is whether a routine UK sortie of F3s/Jags/GR4s/GR9s requesting bootleg would be interested/able to take fuel from a MPRS-equipped KC-135? Given what was said about GW II refuelling, presumably this is, as vascodegama suggests, an RTS issue. Does anyone know, or should I just not bother looking at AARA 8 next time I am asked if there is any bootleg available in the North Sea?