TonyC

The TF-33s on the RCs had either a cartridge start or a generator. We had three generators and one cartridge starter. Absent the cartridge start, we had no bare-base capability (reference absence of APU). That was one of the major hurdles to converting to CFM-56s. I don't know what the ultimate solution was.








.

KC135guy

alarkyokie,

While working on the J-57's, we occasionally had to evacuate the engine shop and call EOD because the flight line every now and then brought an engine into the shop with the breach cap still installed. With that cap installed, there was no way to tell if the cartridge was in the cap let alone if it had been fired.

TonyC,

You only had one starter on the RC's? Would you cart start that one engine and then cross bleed to the other engines to start them? I worked the TF-33's, but only on the B-52's so I don't know the configuration of on the -135's.

The -135R/T's have generators on #1,2 and 3 engines. It only needs two generators and the third one is just for redundancy.

TonyC

Yepp, the cart was on #3. We could start that with battery power only, and use cross-bleed air to start the other three. We still only had battery power until we got one of the others started (usually the other inboard), as the accessory drive could only accomodate one (the starter) or the other (the generator). Because of the heavy electrical requirements of the mission equipment, they were 3 big generators. (I'd have to dig a manual out of a closet to put a number with "big.")


It was very difficult, but we learned it was possible to convert, in the field, a #3 engine (with the start cartridge) to a #1,2, or 4 engine (with the generator) by swapping the accessories. We were hard down in Riyadh with a bad #4, but the only spare we had in theater was a #3. As the Ops Officer, I asked why they couldn't swap the parts. They said it might be possible, but it had never been done before. Nothing like a challenge to raise the morale, right? I even pitched in getting my own hands dirty, and they only swapped two wires on the first start attempt. The engine ran, but the generator didn't. Once they got the correct wires on the correct terminals, it worked like a champ.


I'm sure you're aware the TF-33s (or at least the cores) were also used on the C-141.






.

blastoff

I don't think many, if any, E's were converted to R's. Units that had E's until recently were flying them straight to DMA to be scrapped.

KC135guy

Yep, I heard that they pulled all the 33's off the 141's and were planning on using them to re-engine the 52's since the 141's engines were more powerful. I don't know what's happened with that tho. I'd heard that they were considering using the CFM-56 to re-engine the 52 but I talked with a pilot about it and his reply was he wouldn't want to give up 8 engines for 4. The last 52 I worked on was planted into the ground at Fairchild.

BTW, my hat's off to you for pitching in on swapping out the generator. It's not often we get aircrew asking just how some of the systems work, let alone jump in and turn a wrench. I still really like busting my knuckles. My troops give me funny looks when I step out of my office to start tearing down or building up a gearbox or starter.

KC135guy

The Washington ANG shared the ramp with us at Fairchild. They flew the E's and were getting them re-engined to the R's before the BRAC took all their tankers away. They now fly Fairchild's tankers. They might be bone yarding some of the E's just to add to the parts inventory. Just a thought.

EFD01

-135 Rs and Ts do not have thrust reversers. The AC electrical system on both can fully function with 1 of 3 generators working.

blastoff

Did the same tails come back as R's? My old unit converted from E's to R's a couple of years ago...complete tail swaps, E's to DMA. Was at DMA last week, looks like a TON of E-models out there.

TankerBob

The ANG units were the only units that got the E-Model, they were not re-engined they were traded out for R models, hand me downs from the active duty. I believe they had to retire the E's because Boeing wouldn't continue to sign off wing boxes. But I'm not 100% sure. The E sure was a nice plane to fly, but it definitely couldn't perform in the desert like the R's can.

Oh and I am pretty sure that at my last electrical sim, the system would still work on on generator. Put a high load on that gen, but things still worked. At least for a little bit, till that damn sim instructor decided to make my sim more "fun"

TonyC

59-1514 began life as a KC-135A, was converted to KC-135E and modified for receiver Aerial Refueling (making it an "AC/DC KC" - a Lieutenant Colonel Aircraft Commander in the airplane was an "AC/DC KC LC AC" ). In that configuration, it was used as a trainer for RC and EC crews at Offutt, and as a ferry/supply airplane for the 55th SRW at Offutt.

It has since been converted to a KC-135R.


It may be a one-off exception to the rule, but it disproves the suggestion that none of the Es were converted to Rs, and that only ANG units had KC-135Es. It is true that only ANG units had entire squadrons of Es.



Footnote: According to Joe Baugher's Serial Number database, only one other 59 model went through the A to E to R process. Most of the Es listed remained as Es. (1959 USAF Serial Numbers)






.