Wikiposts
Search

Notices
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 Rivet Joint

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 24th January 2013 | 13:36
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: Vienna, Virginia
RAF Boom Refuelling Requirements

Just some points to remember:
- Two important RAF assets, the C-17s and the upcoming Rivet Joints, are only boom capable.
- Flow rates are about one-third less using probe and drogue which makes a difference with large on-loads for big aircraft.
- Boom refuelling is easier in turbulent air and reduces pilot finesse and fatigue
- Any boom can be fitted with a drogue

There are some advantages in probe and drogue systems, including ease of modification (US Navy aircraft only need to carry a pod).

First RAF electronic warfare officers began training this week.

Last edited by NoVANav; 26th January 2013 at 16:53.
NoVANav is offline  
Reply
Old 25th January 2013 | 13:10
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
From: on track, on speed, on time
RAF EWOs trg - at Pensacola?
PARALLEL TRACK is offline  
Reply
Old 25th January 2013 | 14:44
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
From: Island of Aphrodite
Surely the obvious solution (and therefore the one that will not be adopted) is to convert three of the Voyager orders to MRTTs. The later Voyagers have not been built yet or even started so the change should not be a problem for Airbus.
beerdrinker is offline  
Reply
Old 25th January 2013 | 16:20
  #144 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 68
From: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
"Surely the obvious solution (and therefore the one that will not be adopted) is to convert three of the Voyager orders to MRTTs. The later Voyagers have not been built yet or even started so the change should not be a problem for Airbus."

They are under a PFI contract, any changes would surely just allow Airtanker to squeeze the MoD for a nice tidy sum?
The Helpful Stacker is offline  
Reply
Old 25th January 2013 | 17:04
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 356
Likes: 1
From: the heathen lands
there would have to be a cost - however the mitigation is AirTankers costs are likely to be minimal if the decision were to be made now, and thereforefairly easily absorbed by MOD - and political: if AirTanker quote a ridiculous price the MOD can start making noises in the media about dodgy PFI deals, and whether its lawyers should start looking at whether they can be ditched.

the government has a somewhat larger stick than AT - it writes the law.
cokecan is offline  
Reply
Old 25th January 2013 | 17:19
  #146 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 16,700
Likes: 54
From: Lincolnshire
Originally Posted by cokecan
if AirTanker quote a ridiculous price the MOD can start making noises in the media about dodgy PFI deals,
No, that is far too political. MOD is not nasty like that.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 08:38
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,056
Likes: 2
From: London
Don't AirTanker want an aircraft they can also use in the civvy market when the MoD don't want to use them?

not many civvy street planes have booms attached.......
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 08:43
  #148 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,661
Likes: 7,347
From: Peripatetic
I believe Airbus have ably demonstrated that they are removable......
ORAC is online now  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 08:46
  #149 (permalink)  
40 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 1,960
Likes: 1
From: The Whyte House
There is, apparently, talk of extending Waddo's runway to the South.

A quick look on Google Earth suggests, in theory, another couple of thousand feet could be added.

Presumably the extra 2000' can be folded away and packed in the back of a C-17 whenever the RJ deploys to a similarly inadequately runwayed airfield.

Last edited by Willard Whyte; 26th January 2013 at 10:14.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 09:53
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
From: UK East Anglia
Lightbulb

"There is, apparently, talk of extending Waddo's runway to the South."

WW statement stired up memories of the first Nimrod R take off at 109,000 lb ZFW. I can't rememeber when probably 1990 somethin. Bill Bateman was our weight and ballance engineer and suggested selling tickets in a grandstand by Burge's Garage. Bill was brilliant. I remember taking the a/c down to Boscombe to weigh it post a big mod we had completed. he was only one pound out and quite close to the CoG. (so much of the weight was electric string)

All this talk of flight refuelling probes is getting me down. Should the need arise I am sure the treasury would spring the cash. Marshall turned the C130s round in 19 days back in 1982. It may take a month now!!

Oh and most of our radios in those days were of US origin. Have Quick WW and even the RC HF9000 (first use of fibre optic on an RAF A/C) we used the GPS to time the radios. it took an age to get clearance to feed the twin Carosel IN and Tacan from the GPS. had a similar problem on the C130 a couple of years back (with clearances) so as back in Nimrod days declared UDI and fitted a stand alone system.

DA
dragartist is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 16:32
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: Vienna, Virginia
Ref #151

No. At Offutt. RJ training is at the 55th Wing.

Basic EW training is at Pensacola. The RJ-specific training is done at Offutt. They have a great simulator for the entire backend.

Last edited by NoVANav; 26th January 2013 at 16:54.
NoVANav is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 18:59
  #152 (permalink)  
40 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 1,960
Likes: 1
From: The Whyte House
They have a great simulator for the entire backend.
I hope they pipe in the smell of curry & pies for max realism.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 22:39
  #153 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 116
Likes: 1
From: All over the place
There is, apparently, talk of extending Waddo's runway to the South.
They'd better hurry up then - there's either the Eastern Lincoln Bypass and/or 35,000 houses going on that land !!
howiehowie93 is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 23:07
  #154 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 976
Likes: 20
From: Uranus
Plus also knock down Coleby Church as they will be obstacle limited!
The B Word is offline  
Reply
Old 26th January 2013 | 23:32
  #155 (permalink)  
40 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 1,960
Likes: 1
From: The Whyte House
They'd better hurry up then - there's either the Eastern Lincoln Bypass and/or 35,000 houses going on that land !!
I'm sure the the MoD has thought of every---Oooohhh !!!!!...
Willard Whyte is offline  
Reply
Old 20th February 2013 | 22:49
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
From: at the end of the bar
I notice 'Squarebasher' in Private Eye having a go at the Rivet Joint acquisition.

It's the usual mix of rumopurs and speculation, but one of his points caught my eye - is the RJ procurement under a UOR?

Last edited by XV277; 20th February 2013 at 22:49.
XV277 is offline  
Reply
Old 21st February 2013 | 06:07
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 505
Likes: 41
From: UK
Nope, not UOR. It is a core program...

Last edited by iRaven; 21st February 2013 at 06:08.
iRaven is offline  
Reply
Old 21st February 2013 | 12:36
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: Vienna, Virginia
UOR?

I presume this means "Urgent Operational Requirement".
NoVANav is offline  
Reply
Old 21st February 2013 | 15:17
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
From: at the end of the bar
Nope, not UOR. It is a core program...
Thanks. Thought so.

NoVANav, yes - I live in a world of TLAs (Three letter acronymns!)
XV277 is offline  
Reply
Old 22nd February 2013 | 11:55
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: Vienna, Virginia
Thanks.

UOR means the same in "DoD/USAF-ese".
NoVANav is offline  
Reply


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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.