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

USAF Asks to Shrink Tanker Fleet.

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 Asks to Shrink Tanker Fleet.

Old 9th Jun 2022, 07:25
  #21 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,855
The thread seems to be digressing - the point being the numbers rather than the future types (though the whole next generation manned platform/drone wingman system rather than platform may be spreading out to confuse the issue for the KC-Z programme numbers.)
ORAC is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 07:26
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 468
It's still funny how this moves around in circles for so long while it could be solved with big business for everybody.
Something else I don't understand is why Boeing has not used to beef up the commercial passenger 767 using tanker modifications, like a new cockpit? It could be some robust low cost people mover below the fancy 787.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 08:16
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,549
They NEED to sell 787's not spend money on 767's - they'd be cannibalising their own market.

Asturias56 is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2022, 03:45
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,626
Originally Posted by Less Hair View Post
It's still funny how this moves around in circles for so long while it could be solved with big business for everybody.
Something else I don't understand is why Boeing has not used to beef up the commercial passenger 767 using tanker modifications, like a new cockpit? It could be some robust low cost people mover below the fancy 787.
Being able to sell new passenger 767s has little to do with the flight deck or other updates on the 767-2C. The latest FedEx 767F have a flat panel flight deck display STC that is incorporated in production.
The real problem with the 767 for passenger service is the fuel burn is too high - it needs new engines (10% fuel burn minimum - probably closer to 15%). Problem is such a state of the art engine in the required 50k-60k thrust class doesn't exist. They get away with the fuel burn for the KC-46 and 767F because they don't fly 10-12 hours per day, so the fuel burn is a smaller part of the cost of operation.
tdracer is online now  

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 - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.