Assuming 101 keeps the 10s going until 2015ish, then one would assume another identity would be taken up. 44 or 57 perhaps?

10, it's a magic number...................................................

Surely it will go on seniority (cue debate on how the RAF calculates seniority). Assuming that 216 (16 RNAS) Sqn will be around beyond 2015, then it falls to 10 and 101. IIRC 101 has the edge on seniority.:E

Cough! 206. Cough!

Surely the aircraft will arrive in a stagger allowing a serving sqn to convert to type, or must we really go through the faff of 'standing up' another sqn only to watch one be stood down a few months later???

Question. Will all these jets operate under a civvy AOC?

May I suggest a brand new trade name for this contract...

"I can't believe its not charter!" :suspect:

I would be surprised if it were 101 Sqn as I assume there will be some overlap when the FSTA comes on line. However seeing that running the mighty Vickers fun bus is bankrupting Northern Rock -eh sorry....the government, they may choose to retire the old girl at the first oppurtunity.:D

KC767
 

... any latest news about this never ending italian tanker story?

The last I heard, they were still having problems with the AAR pods - something rather essential on a tanker. And I've yet to see any photos of it conducting any wet offloads to receivers through the pods.

The Italian aircraft (converted airliners, not full-up KC-767As) seem to be blessed with the same 'no windows, crap seats' Rendition-class passenger seating as most other Yank tankers. Nice... Narrower cabin than the A310MRTT too. Which, of course, has proper airline seating.

I understand that the Italians might get one 767 later this year?

They trusted Boeing. Wadda mistake-a to make-a!

Italian tanker refuels
 

Beagle, I think I saw somwhere last week a shot of the Italian KC-767 refuelling from a KC-135 (but not giving any out from the pods ) but I can't remember where ... Another very late programme making justa leetla bitta progressa ???

I understand that the IAF wanted a windowless, austere seating arrangement to prevent the aircraft being being nabbed for VIP transport duties. It may seem like a strange decision but their internal politics are notoriously complex.

At least they were wise enough to specify a freight door and a receiver capability.

Hush! Hush! Whisper who dares....

The 206 numberplate won't be available, as the mighty octopus is soon to make a return in sunny Wiltshire......

Are you sure it wasn't Boeing's picture of one KC-767 refuelling from another?

The KC-30A has also been successfully practising contacts against the A310MRTT; the A310MRTT has been refuelling fighters for several years now and the KC-30A has also conducted wet offloads.

Whereas, unless I'm very much mistaken, the KC-767 has yet to refuel anything except from the boom.

or should we tag onto the US Tanker order when they go for the Beoing 777?


Personally I think PFI should be scrapped and we buy the airbus product.

PFI bailout:"PFI 'may need government funds"
 

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | PFI 'may need government funds'

Looks interesting.

As predicted, really.

:E Will be interesting to see McCyclops and his band of near do wells squirm and spin now. Try to justify less a/c when there aren't enough to start with.

Oh dear, what a pity, never mind.......

No wonder the OzAF realised that PFI was an utter crock and that they needed to buy their own tankers.

And next, perhaps that utter nonsense of MFTS?

"Oh dear, what a pity, never mind......." indeed............

With the Tories very probably soon to take office they REALLY must be rueing the day they invented PFI..............

Perhaps. But years of nuLabor have continued to perpetuate the folly.

The MFTS business model must look somewhat...:\...'interesting' right now.

How lucky you and I were to go through training when the RAF could afford all those Chipmunks, Jet Provosts, Gnats, Varsities etc, as well as QFIs to fly them and military aerodromes from which to operate them.