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

USAF KC-Y Tanker Competition

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.

USAF KC-Y Tanker Competition

Old 3rd Aug 2023, 07:35
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Newport
Posts: 14
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
So its the usual case of "The answers Boeing, now what's the question" in action again
madhon is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 3rd Aug 2023, 15:25
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,082
Received 151 Likes on 53 Posts
Originally Posted by madhon
So its the usual case of "The answers Boeing, now what's the question" in action again
The question is when, if ever, Boeing gets it act together and returns to quality design and production of airplanes?
When will it purge itself of the toxic McDonnell-Douglas culture?
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2023, 17:15
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 69
Posts: 4,497
Received 241 Likes on 121 Posts
Originally Posted by GlobalNav
The question is when, if ever, Boeing gets it act together and returns to quality design and production of airplanes?
When will it purge itself of the toxic McDonnell-Douglas culture?
Global, I'm seeing some positive signs (I know a few Boeing 'new hires' and occasionally see one of the 'older' hands that are still there), but the progress is painfully slow.
Then again, I said something similar shortly before the MAX MCAS hit the fan
tdracer is online now  
Old 3rd Aug 2023, 19:27
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,082
Received 151 Likes on 53 Posts
Originally Posted by tdracer
Global, I'm seeing some positive signs (I know a few Boeing 'new hires' and occasionally see one of the 'older' hands that are still there), but the progress is painfully slow.
Then again, I said something similar shortly before the MAX MCAS hit the fan
I truly hope so, the company means so much to our area, and itís employees, not to mention the tremendous resource to our national economy and security.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2023, 12:14
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,259
Received 3,085 Likes on 1,296 Posts
However, in March the Air Force shifted course on its future tanker modernization effort. Top leaders announced plans to speed up the acquisition of its most advanced future tanker, which was redubbed NGAS, to the mid- to late-2030s, and to cut in half the number of interim tankers it would buy.
Is that an acroymn for No Gas? Judging by the 767 fiasco it might well end up that way, they will still be arguing in the courts by the mid 2030's
NutLoose is offline  
Old 13th May 2024, 14:22
  #46 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,845
Received 1,910 Likes on 856 Posts
https://theaviationist.com/2024/05/1...ker-rendering/

Skunk Works Releases New KC-Z Stealth Tanker Rendering

Lockheed Martin’s highly secretive Skunk Works division released a rendering of a notional stealth tanker meant for the Next-Generation Air Refueling System program, also known as KC-Z, which aims to replace KC-46 and KC-135 tankers in the 2030s. The tanker, which appears smaller than the types it will replace, is shown refueling an F-35A with the flying boom system.

The aircraft in the rendering, first published by the Aviation Week, appears to be based on a rather large lambda wing with canted twin tails. The engines, possibly two, are buried in the fuselage, with the air inlets under the wing’s root (also called “armpit” inlets) and possibly flat nozzles in the rear.

While the design in the rendering is notional (Lockheed Martin released another completely different rendering last year), it is interesting to notice that the concept of low observability is also making its way into the high value air assets. However, similarly too what we mentioned many times for the Next Generation Air Dominance program, the renderings might not be representative of the real designs being developed.

Last year, the U.S. Air Force released a request for information to the industry for a new tanker capable of surviving in contested airspace, mention the service is interested in innovative solutions in all size and performance classes that might address the stressing mission requirements. The service has later started an analysis of alternatives.……..


ORAC is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 13th May 2024, 16:33
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 657
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
A certain proportion of tankers will have to at least attempt to reduce detectability because projecting power across the pacific is going to mean that they'll have to be closer to the combat aircraft - and the enemy will obviously make efforts to down the tankers. The KC46 fleet is looking at using AI support for 1 or 2 crew full operation - suggesting that either there will be a need for many more tankers in the sky or that there are too few crew in the system or coming down the line - obviously in a war scenario these numbers could well be augmented by civ type rated aircrew after all the reserves are recalled.
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 13th May 2024, 18:09
  #48 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,845
Received 1,910 Likes on 856 Posts
Ot the best design I’ve seen - there was one published but vanished a few years ago….

Similar pressurised cockpit section to the above with a stealthy wing which flowed into a twin boom rear with inward canted fins, each boom carrying a boom allowing simultaneous refuelling of 2 receivers.

Legend said the booms were composite with integral fuel tanks.
ORAC is online now  
Old 14th May 2024, 07:25
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,692
Received 410 Likes on 246 Posts
Given that the USA can't mod a 1970's commercial aircraft design as a tanker perhaps these futuristic designs are a little..... optimistic?
Asturias56 is online now  
The following 2 users liked this post by Asturias56:
Old 14th May 2024, 11:10
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 2,838
Received 67 Likes on 49 Posts
Seeing as the KC-46 project was, and is, traveling along quite a rocky road... perhaps starting from fresh isn't the worst idea.
Jhieminga is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 14th May 2024, 12:25
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,203
Received 62 Likes on 12 Posts
From the relative sizes of F-35 and KC-ZZZ, it doesn't look as though the latter will have much fuel to offload.
One might also assume exactly the kind of bow tie signature that China's A2/AD capabilities are optimised against?
Jackonicko 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 © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.