Voyager: AT Aircraft Only??

[Shell Management]

Its funny how now the Voyager is successfully in service no one seems interested in it at all.

[downsizer]

Is it "successfully" in service being that it isn't tanking or flying into theatre? Probably not successful really....

[Shell Management]

Is it "successfully" in service

Yes. Only a pity it wasn't in last weeks fly past in lieu of the Dak.

[lj101]

Shell

Is airtanker currently used by the RAF as a tanker?

No.

Is it flying beyond Europe

If it is, then where and when? Just asking.

[Shell Management]

Priority has been given to reliably flying passengers in enhanced comfort and safety

[lj101]

You should be in politics, nice spin.

[Justanopinion]

In 2000 the FSTA IPT stated that there would be 3 years of negotiations/D&D, followed by 4 years of service transition with an introduction to service (ITS) date target of 2007, an AAR in service date ISD of 2008

Now 5 years late on its ITS and unable to tank still. A fine definition of "successfully in service".

[Shell Management]

All down to a late contract signature by the customer. Roll on defence reform.

[Justanopinion]

Again, how is it successfully in service?

[Shell Management]

Its doing a valuable service and getting our brave boys out of tired 1970s aircraft into modern, safer aircraft. Do you not think that is a good thing?

[downsizer]

Most of the tasking it is picking up was largely done by charter. It is not flying troops in and out of theatre, therefore the brave boys you speak of are still in a 1970s aircraft in and out of theatre. And it still can't tank. So no, it is not successfully in service yet.....

[Ivan Rogov]

Shell Management, are you on crack or just trying to wind us up?

Its funny how now the Voyager is successfully in service no one seems interested in it at all.

No it is not funny or successful, until it is doing all the jobs currently done by VC-10 and Tristar our 'brave boys' (men and women actually) are having to operate 'tired 1970s aircraft' in the most demanding environments. Many of us want it to achieve this ASAP, but it hasn't yet! Oh, and it cost far too much

[Shell Management]

Just think of the saving on expensive civil charter fees.

[cessnapete]

downsizer

And no VIP/'Cameron' cabin fit availability for a year (???), an AirTanker employee told me recently.

[Shell Management]

MAA Red Tape.

[Shell Management]

Read in order.

I was referring to the the VVIP fit (red carpet red tape as it were)

[6foottanker]

Will the RAF ever operate the Voyager at anything like its maximum capability....??? Probably yes in the AT+AAR trail role now and again - but in the AAR role alone?

Take a look at the Trimotor (dare I write its name!) for how the RAF uses a large tanker for 'normal ops'. It has a good fuel capacity, though way too much to justify just a north sea towline when full. It is, however, very useful on Ops/trails (that is, of course, if you can get the bl00dy thing to work). In these times of fuel savings, the days of filling up your tanker and coming back half full are gone.

The KC10 also rarely makes use of its full fuel capacity when operating on local sorties, and similarly only for trails/coronets or on ops does the capability of carrying so much fuel really get used to the full.

Unfortunately, Voyager still won't be able to drag fighters much further than we do now, due to the engine requirements and crew duty limitations of the little jets. We should be able to take more jets per trail though (hotel rooms in Bermuda permitting ). And should Voyager ever get clearance to participate on ops, it means flying round in circles for longer, or further away from your hotel, and since consolidation is no longer an option, this extra loiter capability becomes a useful feature due to the limited number of tankers we have procured.

[Ivan Rogov]

Just think of the saving on expensive civil charter fees.

I would be interested in seeing just how 'expensive' those civil charter aircraft were, ISTR an old thread that actually had some official figures showing they were very reasonable and think it actually worked out cheaper per flying hour than RAF AT. Obviously they can only carry out certain tasks, but the whole point of Voyager is to be able to do the high end military tasks, not just those that any airliner can do

[BEagle]

Well, an...or rather, the RAF Voyager has just flown past BEagle Towers yet again.

And still no AAR pods fitted......

Wasn't the AAR service supposed to be delivered last year?

Any bets as to whether we'll see it in the AAR role soon?

[Duplo]

isn't it supposed to have refuelling pods as standard? What's wrong with the pods then?