• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

RE: Boeing wins refueling tanker deal

Actually, shut down the aviation branches of the US Navy and Marine Corps also. I forgot they rely primarily upon our USAF tankers for refueling of their fixed wing assets.

Ken
 
Ken Stallings said:
I don't think this one gets undone because of the dire need for these tankers. If we don't build them PDQ we might as well shut down the USAF! Our entire aerospace defense effort is built upon the foundations of in-flight refueling.

If it does, then we are frankly screwed as a nation, and I mean in ways we haven't seen since the 1930's. And history had one very tragic and painful lesson to several nations who thought immediate savings on defense spending was a good idea, only to find out within ten years it would have been a frightfully small percentage of the resulting war.

Ken
Click to expand...

You have no disagreement from me on any of that Ken. I am simply stating that up to this point they,the powers that be have managed to make a fumbling mess of it all and while we need the new assets now. Seeing how cuts are coming down on vital projects already, I would not be surprised to see this get hamstrung by more delays or deferment.
 
What ever happened to the KC-10? when I was getting out they were the newest and greatest. I haven't heard of them ever since?
 
jmig said:
What ever happened to the KC-10? when I was getting out they were the newest and greatest. I haven't heard of them ever since?
Click to expand...

It's still around and doing well but we only built 60 of them. That plane always places well in the Airlift/Air Mobility Rodeo.
It's an all around good and well liked plane by it's crews. Boomers and CC's a know who moved over to 10's from 135's loved it. When some of the same people got moved back to 135R's, they hated it and still do. The A330 MRTT is in the same class and the KC-10 and the 767-200 Tanker leans closer the the 135 in cargo and offloadable fuel. If we were going to up our capabilities, it would have made perfect sense to go with the 330 MRTT or go with the 777F platform both of which are brand new airframes. The 767-200 is a mid 80's airframe with ceased production in 1994. One of my cousins is a production manager up at Boeing-Seattle. He says there are a lot of queries about the MD-10F being outfitted for Tanker duty and that airframe is their best seller in F series airframes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top