HarleyDriver From United States of America, joined May 2010, 85 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6403 times:
Does anyone know what USAF tail numbers went to Chile? I've searched and haven't found an answer. The only previous discussion here listed 57-1501 as being one of the aircraft. If someone could confirm this and provide the other two tail numbers I would greatly appreciate it. I was a KC-135E Crew Chief and then a Boom Operator and I am curious if an aircraft I flew on might still be flying. I hope so!!
Now, regarding the third, I personally couldn't find anywhere on board any identification to relate the aircraft to the original USAF number. Actually, some parts were definitely taken from different aircraft (for example MLG), so I don't know where Scramble took their information. Nevertheless, it's also the source I used when uploading.
135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5918 times:
Hi, the Aircraft Identiplate in the crew entry chute (if you have access to it) should atleast show you the Boeing serial number and show the original aircraft tail number.
Quoting Revelation (Reply 3): I for one would have preferred we put money into converting KC-135Es to Rs, but maybe with your experiences, you think it might have been time to move on?
It would have been nice for them to get the upgraded engines, however it is not a cheap upgrade and since Boeing stopped the conversions on the Tankers in the 90's, (yes they converted the RC-135's not too long ago) it probably was more cost effective for Chile to leave them as E models. There are thousands of spare engines worldwide, so replacements wouldn't be difficult and probably quite inexpensive.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12179 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5653 times:
The USAF made the FMS sale to Chile of these 3 KC-135Es (plus a spares aircraft that is at DM) at the time when they were claiming the KC-135E was unsafe to fly due to corroded engine struts.
They tried to retire the entire KC-135E fleet, but Congress made them put about 125 or so in flyable storage. This was at the time the USAF was saying they didn't have enough tankers to fulfil all the missions they wanted.
Also at the same time they sold 3 KC-135Rs to the RAF for conversion into RC-135Ws.