USMCFLYR

I was reading an issue of Av Week today (June 22, 2009) and came across quite a few articles that I found interesting and I would like to hear what other aviators have to say about them:

1) Japan (JASDF) having IOC'ed three KC-767Js with the new advanced aerial refueling boom and Remote Aerial Refueling Operator II system. What do the tanker pilots on the forum think about the JASDF having the 767 version while we languish through the KC-X debacle? What is new about this refueling system?
As one reader points out at a minimum - "A Russian general once said 'Better is the enemy of good enough'".

2) Flight Engineers (FEs) have been around the USN Patrol community for a long time (SP-2H, P-3A, P-3C). Now they are not being included in the new P-8A. What do the former Patrol community pilots and/or Flight Engineers on the forum think about this is the way of responsibilities - the effect on CRM, overall safety, systems management, etc...?

3) There is already a thread on the problems of the F-22 Raptor. I had mentioned that we were looking to export. This magazine had a short article on the F-22 possibility being exported to Japan. It mentions that Japan "..has only one runway capable of handling fighters and that is Naha, Okinawa" It has been a little while since I've been in Japan but I remember quite a few fighter capable runways all around Japan - north, central, and south - then Okinawa. The F-15s might have been based out of Kadena, but that statement speaks past basing.

4) Back in 1990 I toured the Bell Plant around Arlington with a group of wanna-be pilots out of MAG-41. We were given a long briefing on the application of the Osprey. Another of those applications seems to finally be hitting the board. It seems that Bell/Boeing is ready to flight test a version of the Osprey with a turrented BAE 7.62 minigun mounted in the bottom of the aircraft. If you are a believer/fan of the Osprey - it certainly has the potential for many, many different versions of the aricraft.

5) Hey Coast Guard guys....has the Ocean Sentry hit the fleet yet? Anything new? Looks like a great aircraft. If I was transitioning...that is the aircraft I would go for!

6) There is an article on a interesting aircraft called a AT-802U. It seems to be a heavily modified version of the Air Tractor that is already in use for illicit crop eradication. L3 Communications and Hawker Beechcraft, in conjuction with Project Liberty, are fielding this counter-insurgency aircraft. It has 3 hardpoints in the belly and 6 per wing for rockets, 500 lb bombs, two GAU 19s and other weapons and defensive suites. Looks like they would like to get these ready for deployment to Afghanistan. I wish they were looking for Marines to fly these aircraft down in the Helmand region where the USMC recently sent over 4,000. The article also mentions the KA-350ER for the ISR missions using the MC-12W. Are these the aircraft that I heard were coming right out of the most recent UPT drops?
---------------------
So.....some good discussions topics if anyone cares to take a crack at one or two of them.

USMCFLYR

navigatro

1. yes

2. no

3. yes

4. no

5. maybe

6. not sure

USMCFLYR

Well navigatro - that will certainly get the conversation rolling!
I don't understand how your responses relate though

USMCFLYR

RickyBobby

1- You sure that wasn't one of your USMC Generals?

2- Same thing happened/is happening to the C-130 fleet (E/H --> J or F/R/T --> J for the Dept of Navy side). Doesn't appear to be an issue. My guess is the FEs don't like it, pilots are indifferent. New crew concept requires new CRM and procedures. I suspect it's about the same as flying the D v. the A/C for you.

RB

USMCFLYR

[QUOTE]If it was then I would have to agree at some point.
There was something in the mag about the Gunship study for the C-130J. Looks like they are trying to upgrade the HC/MC-130J to J model gunships. They aare basing it off of the USMC KC-130J tanker varient.

Now, now - we still have CRM in the A/C models

USMCFLYR

UAL T38 Phlyer

To me, it looks like a 767 with a KC-135 boom. That being said, the Italian KC-767 looks a lot like the Japanese airplane....yet somehow, Boeing had flutter and refueling problems with the Italian airplane, and I believe it is 3 or 4 years behind schedule.

As far as I can tell, the only thing different about it (from a KC-135) is the Boomer is not in a freezing-cold pod by the boom...he's up-front, and doing it with a camera.

And I don't see how that could be better. More comfortable for the Boomer, yes. More accurate and fewer boom-strikes---I would think not.

I don't understand how Boeing---with a boom-refueling history that goes back to the KC-97 and B-47, circa about 1948, can have such trouble using the same idea on a 25-year old 767 design. Re-inventing the wheel....poorly.

KC-135 guys, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you lose your F/Es as well about 10 years back?

I enjoyed being an FE on 727s, and yes, it could add to the crew efficiency/CRM, but I didn't sense a loss in the A-320 or 747-400 without one, either.

That doesn't add up. I flew into Sapporo in a 747-200 (1998), and there were F-15Js flying into either the same airport, or one within 4 miles.

Is this the Twin-Turboprop? If so, a huge waste of money. A friend of mine has gone Coastal and is flying the Falcon. He tells me the Ocean Sentry costs (if I remember correctly) $120 million each.

The basic airframe would be worth around 20 million, tops. Could they possibly put 100 million in life rafts aboard?

It is the most expensive acquisition in Coast Guard history, is overbudget, and I think, late. My bud tells me that EADS was hired to find the best replacement aircraft and manage the CG's logistics. Guess what? EADS said the best solution was to buy their aircraft, and hire them for logistics.

Another self-licking ice-cream cone. Another Marine-One debacle (replacement Presidential aircraft).

Been done before in 1968. It is called the OV-10 Bronco. Bring 'em back!!! (The D-model is a good airplane for this type of Op; the A-model is a death-trap).

I think yes. It is some model of King Air.
---------------------
So.....some good discussions topics if anyone cares to take a crack at one or two of them.

USMCFLYR[/quote]

LivingInMEM

USMC - do some research into the two PC-9's that the Navy has leased for the past year to test as a new COIN platform. The USAF is also considering such a platform based on the AT-6B (AT-6B Light Attack Aircraft / Trainer - Air Force Technology) - although my understanding is that the AT-6B availability is still too far away to suit the Navy.

If any of the services got moving and made this happen, I don't think they would have a problem finding pilots - to include a bunch of pointy nose types looking to revive the tradition of the A-1 Skyraider (as best as the platform allows, of course). I, for one, am hoping for sooner rather than later on these.

Edit: A quick search on the PC-9 turned up this (http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hts...spx?comments=Y). That is close but not exactly what I was referring to, the article I saw included pictures in one of those Combat Aircraft magazines from a couple of months ago.

USMCFLYR

As long as they were survivable I would be standing in line for that exact reason. BRING BACK THE SPAD! (or version thereof)

USMCFLYR

rickair7777

2) We talked about this at drill last WE...our MPRA guys thought that since the P-8 will have more automation and better pilot interfaces, it should be a safety wash. Since there will be a TACO in the seat, the pilots still have one guy with a different viewpoint backing them up on flight safety.

Of course FE's probably have a different opinion...

LivingInMEM

If no FE's, who does the preflight when it's cold or raining? I am at a loss as to how the aircraft will be pre-warmed or pre-cooled by the time the pilots show without them, I don't think the mx guys will take care of that.