Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Air Force Newest Tanker
KC-46A-Today, December 27th, 2014, the winner of the long-fought and highly controversial KC-X contract rumbled out of its parking spot at Boeing's heavy airliner plant in Everett, Washington, and executed a series of taxi tests, including high-speed runs. The wide-body airliner-cum-cargo hauler-cum military aerial refueler should make its first flight very soon, with some rumors stating that it could happen as early as tomorrow. (foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Nice aircraft! I believe this is late in arriving.
I think this answers the "what's next" question:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE1
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE1
Kinda telling to me that we are introducing a replacement tanker that had, as an airframe, its first flight over 33 years ago and is being retired from service by at least one airline even as we speak. Me thinks the procurement process is hopelessly askew. This airplane was flying when fans were being hung on 135's in Birmingham in the 80's and 90's and no thought was being given to a replacement then? I guess the upside is there will be plenty of spare parts coming from the retired airline fleet and plenty of repair expertise. And somewhere someone in the military is tootin their horn calling this a banner day due to someone's unerring vision. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but this old calls em like I sees em boy wouldn't call this milestone much of a milestone. Progress, yes. Visionary, no. Go Boeing, if they are sharp enough to buy two generation old technology at list price, sell it to em! OOps, that's my tax dollars. Hummmm.
Probably a lot we don't understand about the process. Granted, the airframe has been around since the 80's but all the technology is new. I got to disagree with you on this one bud.
To boot, the technology of the 135's it will replace is out of the 50's with the 707.
Won't disagree on either of your points and I think you know I'm a Boeing fan, so having said that, I think it's a little counter intuitive to replace 50 year old airframe technology with 30 year old airframe technology regardless of whats inside. And the outside is specifically what I am addressing.
Agreed. You remember this was a bid against airbus though. I don't know how good a composite body would be though for a tanker though, and that just leaves the 777, which is 90's tech. Personally, since they already have the KC10's flying, I don't know why the military just didn't go with the 748 to get the most bang for their buck, but then these are the same folks that just now got around to the 737 replacing a prop job for the sub hunting role. Speed of government.