Safety comparisons absurd?
I am trying to put forward some points without being rude so will try again.
Re regulation and civil air to air Range looked at Omega in the US as a template for a civil organisation permitted by the FAA to operate aircraft as tankers.
We wrote to EASA not long after it had been created and used comparative data from military AAR missions against some well known high risk civil procedures like non precision to promote the safety case for AAR.
The drivers for civil AAR when Range was set up were Economic, Political and Environmental (PESTLE ANALYSIS). Specifically, I felt that the threat of an EU Emissions Trading Scheme and a tax on aviation fuel might provoke a trade dispute in which players like Russia and China could deny EU airlines access to their airspace.
Had the scheme progressed fuel in Europe would have been taxed so the idea that departing with min fuel and topping up over the Gulf or even Turkey might have been commercially viable.
Since the scheme did not progress because of external political pressure I have not attempted to promote the idea any further in recent years. However, times change and civil air to air may be looked at again in the future.