How true?
I recall many years ago an American lady I knew telling me that when on a trooping flight from Germany to the US in a KC135 the aircraft had carried out AAR during the flight. I always thought this was pretty unlikely, and assumed she had probably dreamt it during an inflight nap, but could it have happened? Does anyone on here familiar with the type know if her story might have been true?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
recall many years ago an American lady I knew telling me that when on a trooping flight from Germany to the US in a KC135 the aircraft had carried out AAR during the flight. I always thought this was pretty unlikely, and assumed she had probably dreamt it during an inflight nap, but could it have happened? Does anyone on here familiar with the type know if her story might have been true?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have Air Tanker fitted a Boom to any of their fleet yet? Seems a bit daft that a number of RAF aircraft types reliant on just boom re-fuelling while the most expensive PFI deal ever fails to deliver.
Its unfair to say that the PFI fails to deliver, it delivers what it was designed to deliver very well. Since its inception and the signing of contracts the RAF has increased the number of aircraft requiring boom AAR that we’re not on the horizon at the time.
ORAC wrote:
As is the KC-46A Pigsarse - unlike the A310MRTT, A330MRTT and Voyager.
Still, I suppose it's handy for the USA's rendition flights to keep their involuntary tourists disorientated...
The KC-135 is a windowless tube
Still, I suppose it's handy for the USA's rendition flights to keep their involuntary tourists disorientated...
Is that the standard pax fit on the KC 135 ORAC? I had visualised a small section with normal airline type seats, as in the RAFs VC10 tankers, but that looks a bit rugged! How would she have known? Maybe an announcement from the crew?
KC-46A will have 'palletised seats' - airline seats sitting on cargo pallets. How does that work with passenger facility units (in-flight oxygen, lighting etc.)?
It seems that the windowless KC-46A is only FAA-certified for 58 passengers (or 114 for 'contingency' operations). Palletised bog, palletised galley, palletised passenger bags - it really is 'Guantanamo Bay' Class travel.
Compare that with 'up to 300' passengers in the A330MRTT - all in normal airline seating. Seat pitch in Voyager is much more generous than in most airliners, due to the fact that military passengers with their equipment need more space.
It seems that the windowless KC-46A is only FAA-certified for 58 passengers (or 114 for 'contingency' operations). Palletised bog, palletised galley, palletised passenger bags - it really is 'Guantanamo Bay' Class travel.
Compare that with 'up to 300' passengers in the A330MRTT - all in normal airline seating. Seat pitch in Voyager is much more generous than in most airliners, due to the fact that military passengers with their equipment need more space.
BEags
Fair point about the seating etc, looking at the other role however, if the KC46 does finally get going it does have capabilities not available in the A330 family at present. It will (allegedly) be able to refuel large and small probe and drogue rx (KC30A cant do large -no FRU) and boom rx (Voyager cant do that) . Pity we ignored the STANAG on interoperability in favour of the PFI. Mind you the USAF would probably have had all/most of their KC45 s by now (and that did have the full gambit of receiver options).
High Spirits
You'd probably find the current stop at Cape Verde much better-especially if it goes u/s and you end up in an all inclusive hotel.
Fair point about the seating etc, looking at the other role however, if the KC46 does finally get going it does have capabilities not available in the A330 family at present. It will (allegedly) be able to refuel large and small probe and drogue rx (KC30A cant do large -no FRU) and boom rx (Voyager cant do that) . Pity we ignored the STANAG on interoperability in favour of the PFI. Mind you the USAF would probably have had all/most of their KC45 s by now (and that did have the full gambit of receiver options).
High Spirits
You'd probably find the current stop at Cape Verde much better-especially if it goes u/s and you end up in an all inclusive hotel.
I flew KC-135s from 1975 to 1988. When I started we had to wear parachutes and helmets for refueling and obviously no passengers. When I retired carring passengers to and from overseas places was normal. The plane has room for a bout 50 rear facing airline type seats or a round 20 people sitting in the luxurious side facing seats. The fuel is all carried in below deck tanks so the upper part is basically a hollow tube as can be seen in the picture. Baggage and freight share the space with any passengers. That's why the passenger capacity is so low.
Thanks for all the replies re the KC 135 and pax. Seems like the lady wasn't dreaming or making it up!
Big Green Gilbert - you're not kidding. I once flew out to Masirah in the back of a C130 as spare crew. Endless misery! How grateful I was that someone went sick and I came back in my normal seat in a Victor, which seemed like first class luxury in comparison.
Big Green Gilbert - you're not kidding. I once flew out to Masirah in the back of a C130 as spare crew. Endless misery! How grateful I was that someone went sick and I came back in my normal seat in a Victor, which seemed like first class luxury in comparison.
Last edited by Tankertrashnav; 28th Jul 2018 at 10:34.
