The Royal Air Force has achieved an interesting solution to the problem of replacing its aging fleet of aerial tankers — VC-10 and TriStar aircraft. Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force continues its lengthy and, at times torturous, path toward a replacement aerial tanker.
In London the Ministry of Defense has approved a private financing initiative to procure a fleet of 14 Airbus A330 tankers to provide aerial refueling services to the Royal Air Force. The tankers will be owned by the firm AirTanker but will be flown by RAF pilots under the operational control of the RAF. The aircraft will be based at RAF Brize Norton, the largest RAF station and home to the services air transport, tanker, and parachute communities.
The project is estimated to cost US$26 billion over 27 years.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force has received proposals from an EADS (European Aeronautic Defense and Space) and Northrop Grumman team offering the Airbus A330 tanker — with the U.S. designation KC-30 — and from Boeing offering the KC-767 based on Boeings 767 passenger-cargo aircraft. The Air Force expects to make a selection by September 2007 with the winning aircraft replacing the 1950s-vintage KC-135E tankers and, most likely, the later KC-135R tankers. (The Air Force also flies the McDonnell Douglas KC-10 in the tanker role.)
The new tanker selected by the Air Force will automatically become a prime candidate to replace several of the numerous specialized variants of the C-135 and Boeing 707 in U.S. service. These include reconnaissance, surveillance, Airborne Warning And Control Systems (AWACS), and research aircraft as well as cargo carriers. (France, Turkey, and Singapore also fly Boeing-built KC-135 tankers. The A330 is the most likely replacement for the French aircraft.)
The EADS-Northrop Grumman tanker can carry 122 tons of fuel in its wings, reportedly about 20 percent more than the proposed KC-767 design. This fuel arrangement allows the A330/KC-30 to carry passengers, cargo, or additional fuel in its fuselage.
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
Actually, the creative british “solution” smells an awful lot like the disasterous Boeing lease deal, as a way of turning a procurement program into a running operational contract at perhaps significantly higher cost.
Leasing makes sense when either you can’t afford the capitol cost, significant tax breaks, or you may not want them for long (and there is someone else who would then use them). Neither are the case here, so why get the Udvar-Hazys of the world a cut of this deal?
uh
That crazy comment earlier has been removed…
Is there something wrong with the KC-10? Why doesn’t the Air Force just buy a bunch more of those. From what I’ve read they carry more fuel the the KC-135. Could someone please fill me in here.
When Boeing took over McDonald Douglas they closed the MD11 line and the plane can no longer be built, word has it that the Air force wanted a bunch of MD11′s but Boeing just wanted to shut all McDonald Douglas plants down as fast as they could, the KC10 is one fine airplane and preforms great.
A330 is a non-player for a myriad of reasons. Size is its biggest constraint (I won’t even mention that the boom on the A330 is a new creation from a rookie in the field and has not been tested over time like the Boeing built boom). Of the 2 existing tankers, KC-135R and KC-10, and the two competitors, A330 and Boeing 767, anyone who has been in the tanker business will say the KC-135R is the perfect tanker. The KC-10 has been a great compliment and very strong player in the strategic, dual role, boom/drogue world. To have a fleet of KC-10′s would be impractical on size alone. With that being said, the A330 is 8,000 sq feet of ramp footprint larger than the KC-10 and 13,000 square feet larger than the 767, and 20,000 square feet larger than the 135. When you look at fuel loads, offload potential, fuel flow per hour, and several other factors, the Boeing 767 offers more fuel offload potential than the A330 per square foot of ramp space that it occupies. If anyone believes MOG is not an issue, (max on ground), or the number that can bedded down, does not fully understand tanker employment in combat operations. The A330 can accommodate 28 to 32 463L pallets while the 76 can hold 19 463L pallets. Why is this significant? The C-17 only can carry 18 463L pallets. We are buying a TANKER, not an airlifter, though economy says that dual role is smart business. I can tell you from first hand experience and 30+ years in the tanker business, that I don’t want a tanker with ~28+ pallet positions when I go to combat.
Many other points to make, but in short, Boeing is a proven leader, they offer the most balanced tanker for a lot less money, and has been tested over time. The British venture is great for a small Air Force and is a great move for them. This would not be a good move for the worlds largest and most powerful airpower force, the USAF!
I don’t understand why we aren’t buying the 787 as a replacement for the tankers. It is a FAR superior product with the potential to have zero fuselage metal fatigue and far lower operating costs over time with a newer generation of engines.
EADS is DOA. Anyone proposing a foreign design will be shot by the politicians. With good reason.
Politics a usual, we pay more and get less and our soldiers suffer.
It’s a tanker not a bomber. The technology isn’t that sophisticated!!!!!
We have computers right and programmers right. Maybe they should hire competent ones.
Both Colt and Boeing are prime examples of large companies who are mismanaged yet the pentagon continues to subsideize them with barrels of the green stuff.
I know someone who handles Boeing accounts and they(Boeing) are a mess.
Our armed services have to reinvent themselves and should start with the Kiss principle. Make it work and keep it simple until new technologies come along. Then upgrade the exsiting air frame until a quantum leap in technology requires a completly new air frame.
They did that with the C-47, then the C-130 and C-135. What’s wrong with the KC-10?
Reopen the line and build some new one’s with upgrades. Until we have a real leap in technology.
As a “OLD” hand at refueling the B-29 Hose method, then on to the KC135, then as instructor Capt for United Airline on the DC10. I gave the inspection committee at Denver a very positive report on the DC10. The KC-10 was an upgrade, now choose the 787 and you will upgrade again. When better airplanes are Built BOEING will win every time.
Therefore, when I practiced this role, I have also spent much energy and the 2moons gold.
My friends in order to help me, send me much Requiem gold, I was very thank him.
Leasing makes sense when either you can’t afford the capitol cost, significant tax breaks, or you may not want them for long (and there is someone else who would then use them). Neither are the case here, so why get the Udvar-Hazys of the world a cut of this deal?
As your apprentice, I always waste your cheap Habbo Coins. But I really not to think that you left so suddenly, then am duty-bound not to turn back!
Your reality husband can buy LOTRO Gold for you, but I also can be.
Because each people is not so rich, you have Hellgate London gold and you might save much time that practice the level.
If I cannot complete the duty, I will spend many hero gold and have no anything to receive.
That is first time that I used the ice arrow, I was so excited, and in a week I got 4000 mabinogi money.
I want to forget you, but I cannot achieve, see the computer and I remember you, see my cheap imvu credits that I remember you once again.
Of course the Sword of the New World Gold is gained by I upgrade and kill the monsters.
The company always supply cheap snw vis for every gamers. You can first try to buy vis to exchange your love equipment.
My friends also told me that there is a web site http://www.hameim.com supplies cheap Lunia gold.
If one day you want to buy Lunia gold you can go to the above company.
It is the coolest site, keep so!.
I am from Botswana and also now teach English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: “”
With respect :o, Quinlan.
SEX????????????????????????????????????????????????????SM??????????????????????mixi?????????????????????????????????????mixi??????????????????????
buy cheap nokia n95 experience without nokia mobile learning is better than learning without excperi-ence. I have nokia 6300 but one lamp wait which my feet are guided; and that bose headphones is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the apple touch past. http://www.leadsoftstore.com/