Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RAF C-17 - Inflight refueling

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RAF C-17 - Inflight refueling

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11th Mar 2005, 18:25
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RAF C-17 - Inflight refueling

Now that the RAF are going to buy their C-17s, any mention of them being converted to probe/drogue refueling?
tspark is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 18:29
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Funny post, made me chuckle, they're not even allowed to get gas off a boom are they?
rivetjoint is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 19:10
  #3 (permalink)  

Short Blunt Shock
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You'd need a bloody big tanker......

16B
16 blades is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 19:46
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ball gazing
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
....Gazing into my crystal ball, I think that you will find that with the ER tanks (as fitted to the RAF jets) AAR just simply isn't needed....
mystic_meg is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 20:28
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With the ER tanks providing such a lot of fuel, what are the chances of fitting something like the MPRS used on a KC135, to give a C17 (KC17?) a refuelling capability as a tanker?

I know nothing about this so please bare with me as I am just 'thinking aloud' in response to the thread so far.

STH

I'll get me coat.
SirToppamHat is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 20:32
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks easy enough:

http://www.kstope.ang.af.mil/webgallery/pages/C17.htm
D-IFF_ident is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 20:50
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does the C-17 have the plumbing in the wings to get the fuel there and drive the mprs fueldryaulics?
rivetjoint is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2005, 22:45
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NW FL
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks easy enough
Having done both types (boom & probe/drogue), I can tell you it looks easier than it is.

Poking a hi-speed drogue in Albert at night can be a bit challenging, but once stuck is quite easy to stay on.

Conversely, getting prodded in the head with a stiff boom is relatively easy, but staying there can be a challenge - especially in a power challenged Hercules.

Courses for horses, really...
US Herk is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2005, 07:31
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Poking a hi-speed drogue in Albert at night can be a bit challenging, but once stuck is quite easy to stay on.
Challenging? Challenging?? I obviously didn't teach you - or if I did, you didn't remember what you learned!! Refuelling in Albert is the sport of kings; a wonderful way to exercise one's (hopefully) superior flying skills!
scroggs is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2005, 08:32
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just remember if you miss the basket with albert and hit the HF aerials the poor fairies have to replace said item. Looks straight forward, but it confuses them as it isn't a black box to swap over. It takes them a long time to master the skill of box out box in.
Forgive my ramblings as it was a long night and the breakfast beer is starting to work.
lineslime is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2005, 09:17
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: east ESSEX
Posts: 4,677
Received 71 Likes on 45 Posts
USHerk, and Scroggs,
for a quick refresher, go to` Rotorheads- Gallery, p20,` possibly prodding `old BEagle`........!!
sycamore is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2005, 13:32
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,832
Received 277 Likes on 112 Posts
Very probably.....

Possibly the most frustrating part of all AAR work was trying to get the VC10K Mk 17 HDU set up correctly for the C-130.

We might get it to trail, but as soon as the Herc made contact, the blasted hose would often runaway in...red light on...clear Herc to echelon. Clear the Air Eng to wind it and trail it again, then try again... And again....

The low speed drogue procedure worked OK, but for the old '10 to have to fly around at the heights and speeds needed for so long must have fatigued the old things awfully - and it guzzled fuel in the 20 flap/slat out configuration.

One year we seemed to be doing rather a lot of C-130 prodding; the boss decided to make a thing of it so, like good troops, we let him make himself look rather stupid when he asked why the 10 Sqn AAR crews were only getting FJ trade.....

As one SNCO then said to him, "Perhaps it's because their C1Ks don't have centerline hoses, sir?"
BEagle is online now  
Old 13th Mar 2005, 20:13
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NW FL
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Challenging? Challenging?? I obviously didn't teach you - or if I did, you didn't remember what you learned!! Refuelling in Albert is the sport of kings; a wonderful way to exercise one's (hopefully) superior flying skills!
Oh it was quite fun, no doubt - but it's all relative. I was comparing it to boom refueling...
US Herk is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2005, 12:48
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: over here
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm reminded of Robert Prest's remark in his F-4 book that IFR onto a drogue was like taking a running f at a rolling donut!
Nopax,thanx is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2005, 17:48
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for the tips. From what I've heard, if you don't move the control column, the aircraft doesn't move either

I may not be a pro at the AAR game but it seems to me that the boom would be easier because you don't have to stay on it so long.

D-IFF_ident is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2005, 18:43
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeh but I guess it's all relative, if your looking for 100,000lbs of gas in a C-17 you are still stuck there for 20 minutes which certainly makes your eyes water!!
Banggearo is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2005, 18:48
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Having done both (Boom & Drogue). The Boom offers a much quicker flow rate.
Lights on Boom system make life easier when you get in. A KC-10 has so much power in its Boom that it can actually re-position you if you are out of position!

Basket can be a handful to get into. But are always good for a laugh.

BDA is rediculous Full Stop!
Wing Pods on KC-135 are tricky - especially if you are on the left!
Centreline on KC-10 is too flimsy

VC-10 is simply the best Drogue - But I wish it has a boom.



Despite having a huge fuel load, sometimes AAR is essential if you need a small fuel load to cater for a short take-off run and AAR after airborne to go the extra mile, or if your load has a tricky C of G that you need full or strangely balanced fuel to even remain within C of G. - & I'm not just talking about Transport Aircraft!
.


thanks mystic....

Last edited by L J R; 16th Mar 2005 at 20:16.
L J R is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2005, 18:52
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ball gazing
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
or if your load is so out of C of G that you need full fuel to even fly
...ermm.. if your load is so out of C of G you ain't even gonna get airborne mate!
mystic_meg is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2005, 19:39
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Regaining Track
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doing both types (boom & basket) fairly regularly, IMHO boom is harder.

Basket is a bit of a joust but once you are in, your flying can afford to be a lot less precise (the basket can be dragged around a fair bit, the boom envelope is fairly tight).

However, its horses-for-courses.....this p.m I got lucky first time with the basket so big grins!! (thanks Fagin!!)
sonicstomp is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2005, 10:06
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
but will the next AAR aircraft gets have a Boom so it can support the USAF as well?
NURSE is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.