Yoda2

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I was trying to be nice, and vague, with my previous post. The problem is corruption, pure and simple, and it's surely not limited to Boeing. It has always existed, even with some notable examples, but not quite on the scale of what we have today. Sometimes defense programs are purposely drawn out to create additional revenue. I admire guys like Kelly Johnson at Lockheed, and a few others. They were no BS guys back then, and would just build you what you want and deliver, done deal. Sad to see all this happening... Especially as it not only affects our national security in general, but also our troops personally; not to mention taxpayers...

TankerDriver

What they really needed to do is reopen the KC-135 line and make new versions of it. New cockpit, new wing, better engines, thrust reversers, etc...

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

BoilerUP

So basically a taller four-engined 737-900?

Mink

+1

The level of ineptitude and corruption is staggering - within USAF and Boeing. At least with the F-35 mess one can argue that there's new technology / capabilities being sorted out. Not a justification for the train wreck that program has become, but at least there's a little bit of a reason for it getting so far off track. With a tanker...??? It's a transport plane that needs to pass gas. The military has been there, done that.

I guess the small silver lining is that the program has been structured such that Boeing absorbs the financial hit. As it should be. But somehow, someway, the taxpayer will take it in the shorts once all is said and done.

thrust

The KC-46 was ordered without thrust reversers. Because Air Force.

BDGERJMN

Well, there goes the 'of the month' in the Boom window....that's the real tragedy here. #priorities

tomgoodman

The tanker we almost bought:

The World's Only KC-747 Tanker Is Flown By The Iranian Air Force

TankerDriver

Yeah.. i guess so. Given the footprint of the -135, there is no other aircraft that can do what it can do right now.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

PurpleToolBox

Dude that was 2005 and involved the KC767 and lease deal. That scandal, although resulted in a delay of the new tanker, also gave us the much improved KC-46 over the KC-767.

Exactly. We don't need big tankers. The KC-135R offloads a large amount of fuel for its size and weight. Make it more efficient and you end up with an even better tanker.

No. A KC-135R. The 737 is about half the MTOGW of the KC-135R.

We probably had KC-135 pilots pushing that requirement. So stupid. They make a difference on wet runways. And when the runway is wet is when our fuel loads suffer.

I didn't know the KC-46 was ordered without reverse thrust. *** is Air Force thinking?

Although it had a big fuel offload, it also had significant costs associated with it. It also had a whimpy KC-135 boom on the back (sounds like the KC-46 program). The KC-10 had a more advanced air refueling system.

Some of the KC-10s refueling system was designed by a certain McD engineer and I've been told he refused to tell Boeing some of the secrets.

Arctichicken

Dude, you have it all wrong. The boom operator duties will go to the copilot thus saving the Air Force millions, then everyone will get paid.