Rivet Joint Aircraft "Safety"
At the risk of "stirring the pot", all the questions about the C-135 airframes, conversions, records, etc. is what we call BxxxSxxT!
I have about 4000 hrs in both KCs and various RCs in ops; survived a KC mid-air collision with an F-4C that took our boom off, smashed the rear fuselage and dented/damaged the left horizontal and elevator; was Air Staff program manager for one of the RC versions (RC-135U, Combat Sent); and have remained familiar with new block versions, L-3 COMM operations at the Greenville, TX support facility and how the Big Safari office manages the program after retiring from USAF and moving to the space recce realm.
To say that there is anything "wrong" with the airframe, conversion to RJ standard, testing, understanding airframe problems or documentation is totally unacceptable. The particular KC airframes converted to RJs 18, 19, 20 come from the last block of KC-135s built, in the batch just before the RC-135Bs, from which the current RC-135Vs and Us are derived.
The Greenville facility (Majors Field) has had cognizance of the RC-135 program since the late '60s when the original aircraft were modified (then under E-Systems Corp). A very expert location, with a workforce dedicated to developing, integrating and supporting special missions aircraft. This same facility is responsible for many other modifications, including E-4 airborne command posts and others, Bundes Marine 'Peace Peak" SIGINT Atlantiques, and Saudi RE-3s. In fact, during my last visit a few years ago I glimpsed an RAF Canadair Sentinel on the ramp.
The RJs are modified and upgraded every three years in what is called Phase Depot Maintenance. PDM is a complete major parts removal inspection, repair, upgrade and re-wire of aircraft and mission systems. For example, I have even seen entire aft fuselage skin panels replaced due to urine corrosion from the aft loo due to poor crewmembers' "aim" during airborne ops. The process of converting a KC to RC configuration is even more detailed. Boeing work in the past decades has mostly been confined to wing skin replacement in the 1980's (entire C-135 fleet mod) and re-engining to the CFM F108-201 fanjets.
This is all to say that these aircraft are not safe due to some paperwork plans floated to correct MoD/RAF internal problems over the years is wrong. There is a very valid reason the MoD/RAF bought the jets "to the same standard" as the USAF. Interoperability is one, but more importantly, there are fewer problems when the jets are the same as the rest of the fleet. Fleet-wide maintenance, problem identification, upgrades all flow smoothly. The RAF RJs will become part of a fleet of 20 and enter the upgrade cycles in the same flow as the USAF jets, with the exception of UK life support (life rafts, etc,) and putting the galley water heaters back in for "brew ups".
I recently heard the Australian ambassador speak on defence issues "down under". The one thing he emphasized, when asked about the recent order for Boeing P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft was, "You get the best equipped, lowest maintenance, highest operational rate from equipment bought from the U.S. IF you buy the exact same version the U.S. is also operating."
I would hope the U.K. has finally figured this out after the Spey-powered Phantoms (costing 3 times a regular F-4) turned out to be slower at a lower max altitude. The Aussies learned the lesson with the Collins boat fiasco.
After the decades-long tail of the Comet-derivatives, Comet, Nimrod, Nimrod AEW (a 'good' one there) and finally the MRA.4 total waste, I believe the RAF is getting the best bank for the buck in the -135. After all, Boeing designed and built it to '50s standards ("overbuilt" I'd say) and it has been modified, humps added, trailed 5-mile long aerials, had more sections cut-out for sensors, added B-47 wing racks for jammer pods, long noses, bulbous noses, round noses, extended fuselage tails, more than four different engines, chin bulges and just about every other external indignity added. "Flying" through the flak of UK bogus paperwork will be, as you say from the BoB book, "A Piece of Cake"!
This long post is to attempt to set the record straight, Having engaged in long, enjoyable nights debating aircraft with many Brit friends, I am under no illusion that this will end the petty back and forth. I do enjoy the blather. Additionally, I would discount the previous post as from someone with a very bad personal ax to grind about 55th maintenance. Usually individuals on this track have many other personal issues.
Bill
Last edited by NoVANav; 19th Apr 2014 at 01:35.