KC 46 tanker landing at Paris Airshow

[Smythe]

interesting way to make an appearance...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=32&v=PzRGsZJkjUY

[Hotel Tango]

Makes an approach on 25 and breaks off for 21. Only they overshot the CL of 21 and had to readjust a little.

[gearlever]

Nicely done...

[Slow Progress]

No reverse thrust?

[yoko1]

Originally Posted by Slow Progress

No reverse thrust?

I pretty sure the KC-46 does not have reverse thrust. While that sounds odd at first, it is in keeping with previous Air Force philosophy that the extra stopping power was not worth the trade-off in additional weight and maintenance. The Air Force usually operates from long runways where stopping distance isn't nearly as critical.

[boxedlunch]

Originally Posted by Slow Progress

No reverse thrust?

Not installed on the KC-46. KC-135s do not have them either. Most airfields that a USAF tanker will operate into are long enough to make reversers unnecessary. Their additional weight and maintenance requirements further reduce reversers' desirability for an aircraft that is primarily designed to take off full of fuel and land empty.

[Sqwak7700]

Seems pretty short sighted to not install reverse thrust. I can’t imagine it the trade off and cost to remove outweigh the benefits.

Then again, government decision made by government employees. Can’t say I’m surprised.

[LGW Vulture]

Blame leftover manufacturing FOD.

[Sailvi767]

Tankers are never quick turned. Brake temps are not the issue they are in airline ops. Why lug all that extra weight and deal with the maintenance issues. It’s a smart move and you get a higher fuel offload which is the whole point of a tanker.

[Max Angle]

If they had bought the Airbus option they could have had reverse thrust AND a higher offload.

[bvcu]

and operated from shorter runways............

[Magplug]

In a big aircraft, when you land that far beyond the touchdown zone..... The fact that you have reversers (or not) is quite often academic

[aterpster]

Originally Posted by Sqwak7700

Seems pretty short sighted to not install reverse thrust. I can’t imagine it the trade off and cost to remove outweigh the benefits.

Then again, government decision made by government employees. Can’t say I’m surprised.

This is a modified design of the 767. This design did not include T/Rs by specification of the USAF. So, they didn't have to be removed.

[Smythe]

I was a bit surprised, that the Paris Airshow, the head of AF acquisition states the aircraft still show up with FOD.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Smythe

I was a bit surprised, that the Paris Airshow, the head of AF acquisition states the aircraft still show up with FOD.

You're surprised that it's still going on, or that he acknowledged it ?

[oceancrosser]

Originally Posted by gearlever

Nicely done...

Well if I did that I would get a few calls from our FDM guy... Actually it did not look that nicely done. Arrival type of landing.
Over the threshold the left wingtip is still lower than the left gear. An he plants it on the runway after floating along it.
More like embarrasing than nicely done...

[The Range]

Originally Posted by oceancrosser

Well if I did that I would get a few calls from our FDM guy... Actually it did not look that nicely done. Arrival type of landing.
Over the threshold the left wingtip is still lower than the left gear. An he plants it on the runway after floating along it.
More like embarrasing than nicely done...

The pilots must have been very tired after a long flight

[Smythe]

Originally Posted by Smythe
I was a bit surprised, that the Paris Airshow, the head of AF acquisition states the aircraft still show up with FOD.
You're surprised that it's still going on, or that he acknowledged it ?

Both...well, and that the AF would be so vocal at the Airshow.

https://www.defenseone.com/business/...r-away/157786/

[Fly Aiprt]

Originally Posted by Smythe

Both...well, and that the AF would be so vocal at the Airshow.

https://www.defenseone.com/business/...r-away/157786/

Maybe they're really not happy with Boeing and wish to let it be known...

[yoko1]

Originally Posted by oceancrosser

Well if I did that I would get a few calls from our FDM guy... Actually it did not look that nicely done. Arrival type of landing.
Over the threshold the left wingtip is still lower than the left gear. An he plants it on the runway after floating along it.
More like embarrasing than nicely done...

Can't speak for now, but back in the day the military operated with much looser parameters as to what was acceptable for traffic pattern ops. There was generally a perspective that one day we might be required to operate from some "unusual" airfields or with non-standard approach requirements (think bad guys with shoulder launched SAM's out on the approach or departure corridor), so we would intentionally practice close in turns arriving and departing. Not saying that's what is happening here, but military heavies will do things that commercial airlines would never even contemplate.