Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

More KC-46A woes....

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.

More KC-46A woes....

Old 21st Oct 2019, 11:06
  #981 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1
As the (corporate) holes in the swiss cheese line up..

..Will the Frankentanker, like its namesake Stein, be the one to eliminate it's maker???
weemonkey is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2019, 03:20
  #982 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 487
Having been peripherally involved in the KC-46 program since it began, until a few years ago, I never thought to question the inclusion of the Remote Visual System for the boom operator, whose station is located in the forward cabin just behind the flight deck. Was RVS a necessity? Was it impossible to have a boom operator station located in the tail with a window and controls, like it is in the KC-135?

It's Monday morning quarterbacking, I know, but it seems like great increase in complexity, with associated increase in failure modes etc., for a military system. Having a few decades of EO experience, I'm of the opinion its nigh impossible to replicate the visual acuity of the Mk 1 eyeball with a visual system comprised of cameras and displays. Not just a question of resolution but depth perception, system delay, etc. If, for some reason, there was a need to add precise symbology and flight data, etc., something like a HUD could have been used.

What am I missing? Now, considering the difficulties the RVS is posing to the program and the IOT&E, I wonder who else might be asking the same question.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2019, 08:29
  #983 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,481
KDC-10 and A330MRTT remote visual systems seem to be working well enough...
BEagle is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 05:33
  #984 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 487
Originally Posted by BEagle View Post
KDC-10 and A330MRTT remote visual systems seem to be working well enough...
Perhaps, then why was it so hard to get right for the KC-46?
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 09:26
  #985 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,481
GlobalNav wrote:
Perhaps, then why was it so hard to get right for the KC-46?
Because, perhaps unlike the KC-767J whose remote boom system also works fine:
the USAF wanted a 'sixth generation boom system' for the Pigasaurus? Which doesn't seem to be doing very well.
BEagle is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.