Tanker PFI announced...after many years.
No, you misunderstand.
Control of the AAR Mission Planning System in the OzAF's A330MRTT is the responsibility of either the Mission Coordinator or Air Refuelling Operator at the ARO/MCO's console using a Multi Function Control and Display Unit, keyboard and trackball or by either pilot using their Onboard Information Terminals (in place of the tray tables) and keyboards.
However, it was always the assumption that the RAF's A330K would only have the minimum chnages from the generic A330-200, to allow it to be re-roled between military and civil roles relatively simply. Thus, if it doesn't have OITs for the pilots, then the ARO will need to be very au fait with AAR navigation calculations, in particular those needed for AAR trails.
In-flight AAR trail re-planning in the A310MRTT will be similar to the work of an AARC, but the user HMI will be much simpler than working with a laptop program. Basically, the new constraints are entered (e.g hose state, receiver fuel limits, change of available enroute diversion aerodromes etc etc) and the whole trail plan recrunched in half a heartbeat. If the new plan puts brackets in unacceptable locations, then the ARO can amend them and recrunch the plan again and again until an acceptable plan is achieved. So, nothing as primitive as the RAP system, the earlier NAP system or the 'worst diversion fuel state' system of the days of black-and-white tanking.
So if, unlike the OzAF A330MRTT, the pilots' stations are to be relatively unmodified in the A330K then the ARO will need to be the mission re-planner. As far as systems management is concerned, that will be the responsibility of the pilots; the only system of direct concern to the ARO will be the fuel system associated with the pods and centreline hose. Which is simpler than in the A310MRTT where the ARO needs to monitor those internal transfer systems which maintain the centre tank at the level needed for supplying fuel to the pods - and to operate the inner to centre transfer system in manual if the auto system is not available.
The pre-employment course for an A330K ARO will need to ensure a baseline level of navigational competence. Personally I feel that this should be similar to the old style Jet Provost BFTS generic pilot navigation ground school, not the current BFJT fast-jet optimised teaching. Basic understanding of IAS/TAS/IMN relationships, triangles of velocity and basic navigation planning using a nav computer - that sort of thing. Plus all the theory of trail planning etc.
No inherent reason why those without a navigation background shouldn't be able to cope with this, but the work of the A330K ARO will certainly be different to that of either a navigator or an air engineer in the RAF's current AAR fleets.
And yes, I do know about in-car SatNav systems. My Garmin nüvi 660 is an ace piece of kit. 20 ft position accuracy at 500 kts TAS and FL300 is not unknown (when I'm allowed to try it!).
Control of the AAR Mission Planning System in the OzAF's A330MRTT is the responsibility of either the Mission Coordinator or Air Refuelling Operator at the ARO/MCO's console using a Multi Function Control and Display Unit, keyboard and trackball or by either pilot using their Onboard Information Terminals (in place of the tray tables) and keyboards.
However, it was always the assumption that the RAF's A330K would only have the minimum chnages from the generic A330-200, to allow it to be re-roled between military and civil roles relatively simply. Thus, if it doesn't have OITs for the pilots, then the ARO will need to be very au fait with AAR navigation calculations, in particular those needed for AAR trails.
In-flight AAR trail re-planning in the A310MRTT will be similar to the work of an AARC, but the user HMI will be much simpler than working with a laptop program. Basically, the new constraints are entered (e.g hose state, receiver fuel limits, change of available enroute diversion aerodromes etc etc) and the whole trail plan recrunched in half a heartbeat. If the new plan puts brackets in unacceptable locations, then the ARO can amend them and recrunch the plan again and again until an acceptable plan is achieved. So, nothing as primitive as the RAP system, the earlier NAP system or the 'worst diversion fuel state' system of the days of black-and-white tanking.
So if, unlike the OzAF A330MRTT, the pilots' stations are to be relatively unmodified in the A330K then the ARO will need to be the mission re-planner. As far as systems management is concerned, that will be the responsibility of the pilots; the only system of direct concern to the ARO will be the fuel system associated with the pods and centreline hose. Which is simpler than in the A310MRTT where the ARO needs to monitor those internal transfer systems which maintain the centre tank at the level needed for supplying fuel to the pods - and to operate the inner to centre transfer system in manual if the auto system is not available.
The pre-employment course for an A330K ARO will need to ensure a baseline level of navigational competence. Personally I feel that this should be similar to the old style Jet Provost BFTS generic pilot navigation ground school, not the current BFJT fast-jet optimised teaching. Basic understanding of IAS/TAS/IMN relationships, triangles of velocity and basic navigation planning using a nav computer - that sort of thing. Plus all the theory of trail planning etc.
No inherent reason why those without a navigation background shouldn't be able to cope with this, but the work of the A330K ARO will certainly be different to that of either a navigator or an air engineer in the RAF's current AAR fleets.
And yes, I do know about in-car SatNav systems. My Garmin nüvi 660 is an ace piece of kit. 20 ft position accuracy at 500 kts TAS and FL300 is not unknown (when I'm allowed to try it!).
Remove the tray table! How do you eat lunch?
It's the best feature of the Airbus. Most disconcerting
It's the best feature of the Airbus. Most disconcerting
Last edited by Dan Winterland; 9th Jun 2007 at 14:50. Reason: grandma
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oxon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEags,
why not just put the AAR programme on a laptop, with the rest of the mission planning tools and reporting system and leave that with the PNF?
Costs a shed load less than incorporating it into the aircraft systems and clearances for such, n'est pas!
Oh and the Pilots can 'plug in' when they get to the hotel and receive the following days Flight Plan, wx, Notams etc etc!
Cheap boys alternative!
why not just put the AAR programme on a laptop, with the rest of the mission planning tools and reporting system and leave that with the PNF?
Costs a shed load less than incorporating it into the aircraft systems and clearances for such, n'est pas!
Oh and the Pilots can 'plug in' when they get to the hotel and receive the following days Flight Plan, wx, Notams etc etc!
Cheap boys alternative!
In order to replan trails dynamically, the mission planning system needs continuous ARINC feeds from the aircraft air data systems, fuel quantity systems and navigation systems.
Your 'laptop' solution would not achieve this, due to the limitations of the food-powered data input device, so would be little better than a RAPS calculator. That primitive system needs to become a museum piece!
Last year I did a simulated AAR trail from Germany to Lajes in real time with 4 Tornados using prototype software still under development. The route I chose crossed the North Sea, then went through the RCs and UK overland AARAs to Lands End and on to the ocean. The initial software planned some brackets in 'illegal' places, so those were edited manually and a satisfactory plan was then generated. We flew it on the rig, including single hose reversion and trapped receiver fuel. Within the development state of the software, the concept of trail management looked very promising. The software later proved unacceptable for other reasons; however the second generation system currently under development will be much, much better as it amends route waypoint fuel and ETA estimates dynamically.
In its towline mode, last week I flew the new software on the test rig from Germany to Norway and back and offloaded 24000kg in 4 hours of CAP support on a forward area tactical towline. The ability to add or delete receivers, manage the available offload in response to changes in MOTF and ATC requirements etc - and to see the 'actual' vs. 'planned' fuel lines on the display, together with the spare fuel available, takes away all that 'do it in your head' stuff needed in earlier years. The system receives over a dozen live ARINC data streams and is very fast and accurate. It also has a global moving map (north or track up, Lambert or Mercator), fuel system synoptic display, fuel graph, CG display, flight data display and a DDRMI which shows TACAN, DF aircraft heading AND track on an electronic representation of a normal RMI.
Why on earth would you suggest a cheap and nasty 'balance it on your knee' laptop in-flight solution? Yes, your laptop should upload the latest forecast met data and apply it to the stored plan; this should then be transferred to the aircraft. Due to the lack of a suitable 'universal' met system (all to do with propriety data formats or something equally nerdy
), currently the end users will either have to apply an average component to selected parts of the plan or enter the met for every waypoint manually....
. But then the plan is regenerated, popped onto a USB stick and fed to the aircraft Mission Computer System the following day. It will also print out the waypoint list for the pilots to feed to the FMS.
The mission planning software is also able to be hooked up to a classroom ground training rig (son of son of Pennants/TFAST) for basic AAR role training. We trained a customer AAR crew earlier this year using the old software on such a system and will soon be training others using the vastly improved new system.
Perhaps something which future A330K AAR role instructors might be interested in? Orders of magnitude cheaper than a full-up dynamic flight simulator.
Your 'laptop' solution would not achieve this, due to the limitations of the food-powered data input device, so would be little better than a RAPS calculator. That primitive system needs to become a museum piece!
Last year I did a simulated AAR trail from Germany to Lajes in real time with 4 Tornados using prototype software still under development. The route I chose crossed the North Sea, then went through the RCs and UK overland AARAs to Lands End and on to the ocean. The initial software planned some brackets in 'illegal' places, so those were edited manually and a satisfactory plan was then generated. We flew it on the rig, including single hose reversion and trapped receiver fuel. Within the development state of the software, the concept of trail management looked very promising. The software later proved unacceptable for other reasons; however the second generation system currently under development will be much, much better as it amends route waypoint fuel and ETA estimates dynamically.
In its towline mode, last week I flew the new software on the test rig from Germany to Norway and back and offloaded 24000kg in 4 hours of CAP support on a forward area tactical towline. The ability to add or delete receivers, manage the available offload in response to changes in MOTF and ATC requirements etc - and to see the 'actual' vs. 'planned' fuel lines on the display, together with the spare fuel available, takes away all that 'do it in your head' stuff needed in earlier years. The system receives over a dozen live ARINC data streams and is very fast and accurate. It also has a global moving map (north or track up, Lambert or Mercator), fuel system synoptic display, fuel graph, CG display, flight data display and a DDRMI which shows TACAN, DF aircraft heading AND track on an electronic representation of a normal RMI.
Why on earth would you suggest a cheap and nasty 'balance it on your knee' laptop in-flight solution? Yes, your laptop should upload the latest forecast met data and apply it to the stored plan; this should then be transferred to the aircraft. Due to the lack of a suitable 'universal' met system (all to do with propriety data formats or something equally nerdy
), currently the end users will either have to apply an average component to selected parts of the plan or enter the met for every waypoint manually..... But then the plan is regenerated, popped onto a USB stick and fed to the aircraft Mission Computer System the following day. It will also print out the waypoint list for the pilots to feed to the FMS.The mission planning software is also able to be hooked up to a classroom ground training rig (son of son of Pennants/TFAST) for basic AAR role training. We trained a customer AAR crew earlier this year using the old software on such a system and will soon be training others using the vastly improved new system.
Perhaps something which future A330K AAR role instructors might be interested in? Orders of magnitude cheaper than a full-up dynamic flight simulator.
Its a long time coming the RAF replacement tanker.
Strangely enough the arguments haven't changed since I last looked on these Forums eight years ago.
What's worse its the same players contributing - I ask has anybody listened to you over the years? NO!
My guess is the money will be diverted by Gordon Brown to other worthy needs. Who needs a strategic tanker these days - we don't. Just well equipped ground troops.
Strangely enough the arguments haven't changed since I last looked on these Forums eight years ago.
What's worse its the same players contributing - I ask has anybody listened to you over the years? NO!
My guess is the money will be diverted by Gordon Brown to other worthy needs. Who needs a strategic tanker these days - we don't. Just well equipped ground troops.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: themightyimp
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WildRover
Who needs a strategic tanker these days - we don't. Just well equipped ground troops.
I take it you don't think strategically, just short-term tactical. Which is nice. For now.............
That's the whole point the Uk doesn't need AAR anymore. Once we withdraw from the Blair egotistic skirmishes and defend Blighty we won't need expensive AAR machinery.
Spend the money on turning Brize Norton into a home for immigrants, which would be far more effective than the current home for retired RAF types which we seem to have these days!
Spend the money on turning Brize Norton into a home for immigrants, which would be far more effective than the current home for retired RAF types which we seem to have these days!
That's the whole point the Uk doesn't need AAR anymore. Once we withdraw from the Blair egotistic skirmishes and defend Blighty we won't need expensive AAR machinery.
And who do you suppose provides the fuel to those assets supporting our well equipped ground troops in Afghanistan and Iraq? Oh yes of course that would be AAR assets.
And of course by your own theory
Once we withdraw from the Blair egotistic skirmishes and defend Blighty we won't need
With understanding of air power like yours you must be an army officer and I claim my £5!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Spain
Age: 76
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A330
As an ex-A330 driver and ex-Military (albeit a long time ago), I cannot understand the problem. Notwithstanding the false Take-off weight limits imposed by the CAA, the A330-200 is capable of taking off with a full 110 tonnes of fuel as well as a compliment of some 350 plus passengers. All it would need is the in-flight-refuelling pipework. It has the capacity to refuel a great number of little aeroplanes (fighters) as well as transporting a goodly number of troops to anywhere in the world.
However, I cannot see it refuelling fighters from wing points; the vortex would be too much.
CB
However, I cannot see it refuelling fighters from wing points; the vortex would be too much.
CB
Proximity trials have already demonstrated that there are no vortex problems associated with the A330 wing pod locations.
They're actually quite a way inboard of the wing tips as they are fitted where the outer engine hard points for the A340 are located.
They're actually quite a way inboard of the wing tips as they are fitted where the outer engine hard points for the A340 are located.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheesebobcat,
You will see it refuelling fighters from wing points. If this cannot be done then Airbus are in serious trouble with the whole A330 MRTT programme and the bid for KC-X would also be a non-starter. Proximity trials with Tornados holding station in the refuelling position have already been done.
I think most people believe the basic airframe is a sound choice for a tanker. The scepticism concerns the decision to use a PFI to supply the service to the RAF. Also, the "optional extras" that Australia are wisely specifying, giving their aircraft added flexibility, are noticeably absent in the UK version.
You will see it refuelling fighters from wing points. If this cannot be done then Airbus are in serious trouble with the whole A330 MRTT programme and the bid for KC-X would also be a non-starter. Proximity trials with Tornados holding station in the refuelling position have already been done.
I think most people believe the basic airframe is a sound choice for a tanker. The scepticism concerns the decision to use a PFI to supply the service to the RAF. Also, the "optional extras" that Australia are wisely specifying, giving their aircraft added flexibility, are noticeably absent in the UK version.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South of the ex-North Devon flying club. North of Isca.
Age: 48
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They're actually quite a way inboard of the wing tips as they are fitted where the outer engine hard points for the A340 are located.
Strange that no-one's mentioned using A340 or 380 in a militarised role yet!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South of the ex-North Devon flying club. North of Isca.
Age: 48
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The post earlier on in the thread for instance that questions 2 donk reliablity, or the post about the Iranian 747s.
On the other hand I hear there's some fairly low hours KC135's sat in the Mojave desert that could be re-engined with CFM56's!
On the other hand I hear there's some fairly low hours KC135's sat in the Mojave desert that could be re-engined with CFM56's!
On the other hand I hear there's some fairly low hours KC135's sat in the Mojave desert that could be re-engined with CFM56's!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and who is more than capable of operating an FMS
You mean lean over and press "direct to" when the Nav's out having a Jimmy Riddle ?
Suppose that classes as operating an FMS......
(From an ex VC10 driver than now handles his own FMS......just.)
(P.S. VC10 FE's. Salt of the earth in all honesty.
)
BEagle as a retired Officer what would you know about Trolls, you need to get out more. I think we all tire of your pompous holier than though attitude. It was a point of view - juts like anyones on this Forum.
A for operating FMS's - anyone with half a brain can programme an FMS. The /H function could be very useful if adapted to fly a towline.
A for operating FMS's - anyone with half a brain can programme an FMS. The /H function could be very useful if adapted to fly a towline.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 82
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WR (Probationary Pruner)
Yes, this forum represents points of view. However, Beags posts (with the exception of his regretable prejudice against cavalwy orficers) are usually to the point, highly expert and well expressed. Yours, on the other hand, are facile, puerile, bigotted and combative.
I suspect we know whose attitude we really all tire of. Are you still on probation?
Yes, this forum represents points of view. However, Beags posts (with the exception of his regretable prejudice against cavalwy orficers) are usually to the point, highly expert and well expressed. Yours, on the other hand, are facile, puerile, bigotted and combative.
I suspect we know whose attitude we really all tire of. Are you still on probation?