Gas

[Green Flash]

A question (probably daft, possibly in BEagles realm but others may enlighten me)

Whilst attending RIAT I noticed (like, how could you miss) the Large White Bowser lurking on the south side. OK, it's a private tanker, hoses for sale etc etc but do they actully take this thing into a shootin' war - how on earth do you insure a civvy registered (US civ number) flying petrol bomb in a war zone? Or is it just exercise play only? Bet the premiums a tad steep!:ooh:

GF

[BEagle]

Probably one of those ancient 707s operated by Omega Air. Used mainly by the USN becuse SAC are stubbornly obsessed with the flyable boom system and, as a result, not many of their a/c have wing AAR pods.

[Green Flash]

Beags, M'Lud

It was a KC-10, wing pods, can't say for sure if it had a boom. Belongs to Global Airtanker Services. It swanned in on the Friday and poked off to Farnborough on Sunday. Surprised you didn't see it. Had all the doors open and was showing all and sundry around the beast.

[rivetjoint]

It was based on the K/DC-10 and had equipment for both refuelling methods visible. The majority of US tanking isn't done under hostile fire so until they sort out their tanker issues the crew were expecting contract work to increase in the near future...from anyone who wants gas not just USN.

[Green Flash]

Rivetjoint

Thanks. Didn't think they would take it somewhere exiting! Presumeably the idea is to release USAF/USMC gas cabs forward. Won't that impact on the uniformed currency/training stats??

[rivetjoint]

I don't know anything other than hearsay but I suspect the number of receivers has gone up in recent years rather than the military crews flying fewer hours.

[Fox3snapshot]

The whole concept of civvy tanking is not that irrational!

If you were to have been a part of, monitered or were in the picture in the Afghan or last Iraqi campaign, most AAF platforms did not have to enter theatre.

The F15's, 16's, 18's, B1's, B52's, B2's blah de blah did there top ups in international, or Coalition controlled airspace !

Yes, there was still a critical element of tanking that occurred in a hostile environment, and if they weren't where they should have been it was because the RV's stuffed up, lets face it an 80's vintage KC10/135 you are not in a position to play "how's ya father" with a live SAM site!

To throw some gas at the lads and ladettes in a campaign does not need to be in the middle of a furball....it is no different to the AWACS capability, sitting on the peripheral and acheiving the aim is the name of the game!

:8

[Cat5 in the Hat]

how on earth do you insure a civvy registered (US civ number) flying petrol bomb in a war zone? Or is it just exercise play only? Bet the premiums a tad steep!

Probably the same way as the CBWF (Central Britain White Fleet) contract runs for the vehicles.

An agreed amount of 'damage' is set before the vehicles hit a war zone, and on return, the damage is assessed against what was allowed, and the MOD billed accordingly.

I'd hate to consider what would happen if your landrover broke down in theatre - phone up your local MTO, and get him to call Lex one-stop?

[Regie Mental]

I beleive the DC-10 dragged the two F/A-18Es across the pond for RIAT/Farnborough, presumably paid for by Boeing.

[sonicstomp]

Experience of the last two shindigs (particularly Afghanistan) was that AR & AWACS are increasingly operating over the FLOT from a very early stage.....

On the AWACS side its mainly driven through the need to maintain robust comms with ground forces. (of the SF variety).

All the jets need now is a decent DAS!

:-)

[Check 6]

Here is a link to the Omega Tanker (http://www.electwarairc.com/KC707.htm) web site.

Check 6

[PPRuNe Radar]

Probably one of those ancient 707s operated by Omega Air.

The one I flew in recently was built in 1969. Of course, I could have flown in an ''ultra modern'' RAF tanker dating from 1966 I guess :E