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 Rivet Joint

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 24th Jan 2013, 13:36
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vienna, Virginia
Age: 74
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 Jan 2013 at 16:53.
NoVANav is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2013, 13:10
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: on track, on speed, on time
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RAF EWOs trg - at Pensacola?
PARALLEL TRACK is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2013, 14:44
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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  
Old 25th Jan 2013, 16:20
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes on 16 Posts
"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  
Old 25th Jan 2013, 17:04
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: the heathen lands
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
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  
Old 25th Jan 2013, 17:19
  #146 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
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  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 08:38
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 08:43
  #148 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,381
Received 1,581 Likes on 719 Posts
I believe Airbus have ably demonstrated that they are removable......
ORAC is online now  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 08:46
  #149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 Jan 2013 at 10:14.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 09:53
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 16:32
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vienna, Virginia
Age: 74
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 Jan 2013 at 16:54.
NoVANav is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 18:59
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 22:39
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All over the place
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 23:07
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 958
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
Plus also knock down Coleby Church as they will be obstacle limited!
The B Word is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2013, 23:32
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 sh*t...
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 22:49
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 Feb 2013 at 22:49.
XV277 is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 06:07
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 503
Received 40 Likes on 10 Posts
Nope, not UOR. It is a core program...

Last edited by iRaven; 21st Feb 2013 at 06:08.
iRaven is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 12:36
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vienna, Virginia
Age: 74
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
UOR?

I presume this means "Urgent Operational Requirement".
NoVANav is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 15:17
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 11:55
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vienna, Virginia
Age: 74
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks.

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