USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids

Real aviation things here. News, items of interest, information, questions, etc!

USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids

Postby OVERLORD_CHRIS » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:43 pm

[quote] USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids

Jan 20, 2011

By Amy Butler

Contractors submitted revised proposals for the U.S. Air Force
Image
User avatar
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Chalreston SC

Re: USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids

Postby Ivan » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:18 pm

What is the reason why they didn't buy more KC-10s instead of keeping the huge herd of KC-135 variants. Or is there some technical reason for keeping the old planes
Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and [url=http://an24.uw.hu/]An-24RV[/ur
Ivan
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 5805
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 8:18 am
Location: The netherlands

Re: USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids

Postby OVERLORD_CHRIS » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:58 pm

When they bought the original 60, they were some of the last few new ones off the assembly line, and they waited to late to decide that they needed more, and by that time, every one started moving on to Twin Engine ETOPS once engine performance was much more reliable. Now they are becoming harder to maintain with the ops tempo. But since they can still fly until the KC-Y/Z bid comes up, it is cheaper to go glass flight deck like the Dutch KDC-10.

Also the USAF would not buy used cargo planes for fuelers, they would have to be new, since they would have to be able to fly for no less then 40years before they consider replacing them with something with greater capacity, rage, and performance.

So it would not make since to buy a used DC-10, or MD-11 and convert it, because the way they fly it, much like FedEx and UPS, they would run the air frame hours up in a hurry, as well as run the risk of unforeseen metal fatigue like in the KC-135.

**Also C-17 & C-5 Pilots hate taking gas from 3 Engine Tanker, even though they carry the most fuel. The #2 motor blows directly onto the Horizontal Stabilizer During Air refueling, it causes to much turbulence and you run the risk of breaking away more often**
Last edited by OVERLORD_CHRIS on Thu Jan 20, 2011 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Chalreston SC


Return to Real Aviation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 492 guests