Peak strength of the tanker force?
 

As we prepare for the introduction of the Airbus Voyager, my mind turned to how 14 aircraft will replace all of those VC10s and TriStars.

OK, there are fewer now, as the VC10s have been retired as they came up for majors, and I guess that we need fewer tankers than when the FSTA requirement was drawn up, but despite the greater capability of the A330 tanker, sometimes you need hoses in the sky, and 14 aircraft seems a slender force (especially given that five of them will be only available for 'surge').

So what was the peak strength of the tanker and strategic tanker force?

36 tankers and three transports?

26 VC10
13 C1K ex C1 converted between 92-96
5 VC10 K2 ex Gulf Air Standard converted between 82-87 wfu 2000-2003
4 VC10 K3 ex EAA Super converted between 82-87
5 VC10 K4 ex BA Super converted between 90-??
(one C1K written off before all the C1K/K4 conversions complete?)

Six TriStar tankers and three transports
2 K1 ex BA Tri* 500
4 KC1 ex BA Tri* 500
2 C2 ex PAA Tri* 500
1 C2A ex PAA Tri* 500

Four Hercules
4 Hercules C1K

And what is it now? No Hercs, no VC10 K2s, leaving what, nine C1K, four K3, and two K4, plus the TriStars? Or less?

Less.

Remember that there aren't many aircraft left to refuel either......:mad: No F3s, no Jaguars, no Buccaneers, no Phantoms, no Lightnings, no Nimrods, fewer C130s and no Harriers / SHARs. Just a few TypHoons and Tornados, plus the occasional E-3 and C-130.

By the way, where are my slides?

Would have thought about 1991 would bring in the Victor Force as well; the back end of the Cold War era must have been the period of greatest capability?

Not faint enough BEagle!!

WEBF is bound to spot it and........................................

Worry not BomberH - as far as WEBF is concerned a carrier can get its strike aircraft so close to it's targets that they never need AAR. Fact. Besides, he won't read this thread as it doesn't have the H or C word in the title.;)

Back on thread - would the drawdown of the Victor force be a factor or was there effectively a 1 for 1 swap with the converted 10s?

57 Sqn disbanded in '92 and 55 Sqn the following year, there were only 24 K2s converted so by the end I would expect maybe 4 or 5 at disbandment time- anyone out there actually know?

Peak tanker fleet...?

In the mid 80s I thought there were about...

2 Sqns Victors
6? Vulcans converted as a stop gap measure?
6? C-130Ks
??? Tristars

Not sure if the Tristars were doing tanking them, but they were certainly in RAF service.

So maybe the AAR fleet peaked in the mid 80s....?

I'm sure someone with more knowledge can expand on that...

In the late 60s/early 70s there were three squadrons of nine Victor K1/K1a tankers, plus four B1a's on the OCU which could be quickly converted to 2 point tankers if required. That made a possible 31 aircraft, although of course the fuel uplift available was considerably lower than that of the 24 K2s, (particularly when flying out of Masirah in the afternoon :eek: ).

And Buccaneer tankers.

Remember seeing a picture of a Bucc refuelling a Tristar. Those were the days!

No more Black Bucks then. :(

Jackonicko,

Your maths is off: 13+5+4+5=27 (not 26)

IIRC from my time on the VC10, the RAF had operated a total of 28 VC10s (if you include the RR testbed), which was exactly half the total number of VC10 fuselages built by Vickers (53 flying aircraft + 3 fuselage sections for testing).


Kitbag,

"57 Sqn disbanded in '92 and 55 Sqn the following year ..." Not correct, I'm sure - I flew the Victor K2 on 55 Sqn from 1990 until the fleet folded in Oct/Nov 1993 - 57 Sqn had been disbanded before I even got to RAF Marham!

Mr B, absolutely correct, can't even claim a typo, they (57) folded on 30 Jun 86. My error.

Or from an earlier era there was this one!

http://www.seavixen.org/resources/42...ugged%20in.jpg

Ah!! But being Navy, did he know it was there??

So who's going to refuel our "new" Rivet Joints , unless they can fit a probe off some scrapped VC-10s ? Will we have to hire some time from airborne KC-135s ?:confused::confused: