Merlin refueling from a C130 today
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Merlin refueling from a C130 today
As per the NOTAM (albeit a different date) seen in this thread :-
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ghlight=C-130K
A Merlin from Westlands was refueling from a C-130 today in a line between Chard and Blandford Forum.
Does anyone know if it was an RAF C-130 or was it borrowed from Marshalls or the 352nd SOG?
Edit:-
Just found out it was an Italian Air Force C-130!
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ghlight=C-130K
A Merlin from Westlands was refueling from a C-130 today in a line between Chard and Blandford Forum.
Does anyone know if it was an RAF C-130 or was it borrowed from Marshalls or the 352nd SOG?
Edit:-
Just found out it was an Italian Air Force C-130!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see a pre-ratification copy of ATP 56(B) Part 3 - Rotary Procedures is now up on the RAF site - https://cms.raf.mod.uk/rafpublished/...irtoair56b.cfm
I would commend it as an interesting read to any tanker crews out there, regardless of whether you do rotary AAR.
And I can't wait to hear Beag's take on the 'RV Hotel'!
I would commend it as an interesting read to any tanker crews out there, regardless of whether you do rotary AAR.
And I can't wait to hear Beag's take on the 'RV Hotel'!
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
I can remember controlling rotary AAR from Neatishead back in 75-76. The TTL was to the east of Great Yarmouth. Apart from the very slow speed the only unusual factor was instead of rolling the chicks out behind and below the tanker, you rolled the tanker out behind and above the chicks - it then slowly overtook for the RV.
Champagne anyone...?
Would be nice for us to get involved with this sort thing but sadly the C130J has a fully developed, trialled and operationally tested wing-pod system in use with both the USMC and the IAF.
Thus it would take at least 10 years and £450M for BAe, Marshalls and Qinetiq to implement, design and test a system for the RAF. From what I've heard, the mooted RAF system involves throwing paper cups full of fuel off the ramp at passing aircraft.
Thus it would take at least 10 years and £450M for BAe, Marshalls and Qinetiq to implement, design and test a system for the RAF. From what I've heard, the mooted RAF system involves throwing paper cups full of fuel off the ramp at passing aircraft.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, but you're missing some essential procurement and development issues Stoppers. You can't just use any paper cups, for example. They have to be tested to withstand a 15g load, and a 3g impact, and remain flimsy at temperatures of -56C. etc 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bristol
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC
Nothing changed through out my time with either Helo AAR or KC135/VC10 to Herc refueling. You just got better at reducing the time the tanker was chasing the receiver. Best you could do was to have the tanker steady up on the receiver course as he past overhead.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Thus it would take at least 10 years and £450M
So soon and so cheap!! Impressive. That's progress for you .....
Thus it would take at least 10 years and £450M
So soon and so cheap!! Impressive. That's progress for you .....
Theres no final quote available but try doubling everything and you might be close.
Guest
Posts: n/a
LBGR
Sadly, you are right. You would think that given a problem, with the solution STARING THEM IN THE FACE, someone, somewhere, would make the decision, end up with a nice warm glow and begin to re-establish everyones faith in the procurement system. You would think, wouldn't you?
However, to save 18.3p per airframe the MoD insisted that 2 split washers that would allow retrofitting of the pods be removed at the factory before delivery. Drive a hard bargain they did. The washers can be put back of course - but it means taking the entire wing off at £84.9 billion per cab.
Sadly, you are right. You would think that given a problem, with the solution STARING THEM IN THE FACE, someone, somewhere, would make the decision, end up with a nice warm glow and begin to re-establish everyones faith in the procurement system. You would think, wouldn't you?
However, to save 18.3p per airframe the MoD insisted that 2 split washers that would allow retrofitting of the pods be removed at the factory before delivery. Drive a hard bargain they did. The washers can be put back of course - but it means taking the entire wing off at £84.9 billion per cab.
