Omega Air KDC-10s
 

Does anyone know who carried out their tanker conversions and were the booms and pods done at the same place and/or time?

They had an aircraft on display at Farnborough last year with pods fitted, but rumour has it that they were not functional, no internal pipework etc. It was just a ploy to get customers interested I'm told. Work would be finished if they signed someone up.

Are these the DC-10's that are being mod'ed into Fire Bombers for dropping water and retardant?

There is an article here about the conversion work.

Conversion work is on ex JAL DC10-40

Hope it helps :ok:

Intersting to see where they intend to position the Pod and HDU controls Not that much space on the FE panel :O

The link shows some good photos. Some were taken at Farnborough last year. I understand though that the DC-10 was just for show. The boom and pods were removed before the aircraft took off.

As for the operating station, the Dutch Air Force tankers have it on a pallet that is loaded in the cabin and is removed dependent on the role employed.

They have been succesfully using the 707s but I don't know if they have managed to use a DC-10 yet.

interesting article especially when the US Defence Science Board recently recommended looking at converting more -10s instead of acquiring KC-767s.

Giz a job? ;)

And this should make it up to 15 characters...

I was under the impression that the Omega boys had brought some F-18's over the pond to RIAT last year.

The Omega boys, or Evergreen, which everone you want to call brought the Jet over in fully working order. Not sure about the RIAT thing though. The company was trying to put forward a case to the RAF for a interim tanker, should the VC10 or the TRISTAR be retired early. As for removing the Pods before flight, thats a bit daft, seeing that it would only save them around 5% in fuel burn. Especially seeing that they didn't have any cargo space to put them in or a large engineering team. As for the boom, I didn't think you could remove that, please correct me if I am wrong. It would be like taking the HDU from a VC10. As for the controls, the engineer had control of the pods, but for the boom, they had a little man down the back. There was some debate as to whether the pilots should have control of the pods, seeing as the engineer didn't have a camera like the VC10. The compromise was the eng, but it was still under trial.

Hope this helps:ok:

With regards to the pods are they produced by Flight Refuelling (FR) or whatever they are called today?

Remember back in the early eighties going to Long Beach to demonstrate the FR Mk32 variant as a retro fit to the USAF KC10

The Omega Air KDC-10 conversion uses FRL AAR pods; their KC-707s use Sargent Fletcher SF300 pods.

Yep got that, should have read the article fully, :{ FRL MK32 900 series. From experience found that the 32 was a realiable pod after initial teething problems.

So could the DC10-40 be a contender to replace the VC10. Save money in the fact that all the air force has to do is cross out V and replace with a D on all paperwork :O

The DC 10-40 was originally put forward as a FSTA contender by one bidder - who was one of the first to be downselected at an early stage of the programme...

BEagle

Was the downselection partially based on the ridiculous "fly chavs to Ayia Napa" scheme or purely on military mission capability? How did it compare to 767K and 330K in terms of what the RAF requirement was?

Not something to which I was privy, chum.

But I had a look around one of their a/c when it came to Brize and was decidedly unimpressed. Even more ancient than Nigel's B767-346 a/c. Useless for pax carrying, but it might have been OK as a basic tanker/freighter, so wasn't really a tanker-transport...

I still think that the A310MRTT is the best value for money AT/AAR a/c although the A330MRTT will be ultimately even more capable - if, of course, you need all that capability in the same place.

Hoses in the sky....

Airbus A310MRTT - World Wide Mission Support

Can one assume that the AAR operator's station on the A310 MRTT will keep Navs employed in the Tanker/Transport fleet :( or would it be offered up as a new branch of the airforce

Engineer, currently the first few A310MRTT AROs are ex-navigators except for one GAF SNCO.

My view is that the skill set required, particularly for trail missions, favours a navigator but that the job could be done by suitable Air Engineers.

By the way, there are loads of errors on that link you posted. For example, the cockpit layout shown is years out of date! Currently the Fuel Operators' Station is being re-engineered to take 2 x 15" screens and the Mission Computer Subsystem; it is located in the front cabin adjacent to the galley.

The GAF/CF aircraft have 4, not 5 ACTs and the total fuel load is roughly 72000 kg.

System spec reqt is 2 x 420 US gall per minute transfer rate which equates to roughly 2 x 1250 kg/min, depending on the fuel SG value assumed.

Airbus A310MRTT - World Wide Mission Support

Omega KC-707 brought over two F-18E/F's last week to the Paris Air Show, it then went home via Prestwick and will come back to take them back home.

The -707 frequently takes the F/A-18s around and supports JMC often when the USN Carriers take part and also during Clean Hunter.

They favour Prestwick when operating out of the UK.

thanks BEags. Interesting info there.

These KDC10s, are they in a similar configuration to the Dutch AF, with pax seats down the back. Or are they similar to the USAF KC10s, with palletized seats at the front?

Also, are Omega offering Trail support with the formation leader (tanker) planning and controlling the fuel for the customers (chicks). Or are receivers expected to plan their own fuel uploads, abort airfields etc, and the tanker is just a convenient flying gas station?

What about their other operating standards, ATP56A, DoD, UKAARNIs, FAA or company policy?

Does anyone know if the Mk 32 pods have given any problems with buffet on the KDC10?

And is there a fuel jetison system or fuel redirected through the wings for pod fuel cooling? Only I think the choice of system can affect fitting and removing the pods. 5% isn't much on the face of it, but over a year and contracting-out bucket and spade jobs 5% can make a significant impact on profits.

Anyway, about that job, any info on how to get one and what the terms and conditions are like?

Questions, questions...

Two photos from Farnborough last year. The second one shows the aircraft leaving without the IFR equipment fitted.

http://photos.airliners.net/middle/9/5/5/624559.jpg

http://photos.airliners.net/middle/8/0/4/698408.jpg



(In case the images don't show (as the don't appear to on my PC)

http://photos.airliners.net/middle/9/5/5/624559.jpg

http://photos.airliners.net/middle/8/0/4/698408.jpg