Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A Tribute To The KC-135  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3757 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9842 times:

There been a lot of post about the KC-135 replacement, I should know I post one of them. But I was thinking, why don't we enjoy these classic while they are still around. This aircraft was built as jet tanker that could fuel B-47 and B-52. The piston power KC-97 was to slow to fuel the B-47 so the USAF looked to buying a jet tanker. It made since that the maker of the KC-97 and B-47 (Boeing) would was chosen to build this jet tanker. Though Boeing Dash 80 project, Boeing was able to build the KC-135. The KC-135 has an out standing history in the USAF, and is still making history. I was able to talk with a KC-135R pilot and walk though the same KC-135R cockpit, the pilot told me he love his aircraft. I notest that the R model has been modified a with two men cockpit. With so much talk about the KC-135 replacement I just wanted to give the KC-135 it's "props".

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSocal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9794 times:

I was at March ARB over the weekend and I also heard of the KC-135 tribute.
And yes, it deserves it's props...........................



I Love HNL.............
User currently offlineEchster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 400 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 9787 times:

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
But I was thinking, why don't we enjoy these classic while they are still around.

New tanker or not, it'll take 20 years to replace them all. If I'm around in 20 years, that'll be the real miracle! LOL


User currently offlineJAM747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 550 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9676 times:

Are there any bases in the New York area to see KC -135s?

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 9666 times:

The KC-135 just had it's 50th birthday on 8 Sept. since its first flight. It is one of the world's great airplane designs. Yes, I know the B-52 design is still around, but the first KC-135, production airplane #1, 55-3118, built in 1955, is still flying in the USAF. The KC-135 was built from 1955 to 1964, in 1958 the C-135 joined the production line and the RC-135 started in 1959. The KC-135 has been converted or built into 28 different missions and 29 different models. The -135 airframe has become the most versital and useful airframe ever built by anyone, it has been flown by the USAF, USN, NASA, French AF, Singapore AF, and Turkish AF. It seems there is no mission the KC-135 airframe can't do. For the B-52, only the H model is still flying, they were built in 1961 and 1962.

JAM747, you can see some KC-135E/Rs at McGuire AFB, NJ, not to far from NYC (I think they are still there). They are part of the NJANG. The PAANG has some KC-135Rs at Pittsburg ANGB (PIT), and the NHANG has KC-135Rs at Pease ANGB (PSM). A little further away the MEANG flys the KC-135E at Bangor ANGB (BGR).


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 9646 times:

Quoting JAM747 (Reply 3):
Are there any bases in the New York area to see KC -135s?

NYANG Niagra Falls has a KC-135R Squadron.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 17
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9608 times:

I wonder if their is any other aircraft in any other air force that was utilized for so many different missions. Living here in Tucson over the years I drive past AMARC especially out on the most northern storage area. I have seen so many different version that have now been chopped up of course. I am not sure of all the particular missions of the aircraft but It seems that many different variants were made.

A couple years ago their were 2 aircraft parked near the fence , they had standard USAF markings and numbers. In addition the aircraft had "OPEN SKY" painted on the sides above the window belt large black letters. I think these aircraft were used for Atomic test recon. It seems that I heard that these aircraft may have been re instated into service ?

Right now their are several aircraft parked their that must be CC versions of some type. The AFB tail code in OF assume Offut AFB. The aircraft must have at least 15 antennas on the top some of them quite large. I assume these were C&C or for nuclear forces. ?

I have also seen several US Navy aircraft their , look to be early E6 or something.

Anyway , I love the aircraft and also love to imagine the missions and people who flew them and all the history around them!



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineTaxPilot From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 99 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9568 times:

Great airplane, but we thought it was old when I flew it 1975-80. Amazing tanker task-force missions out of PSM moving Squadrons and Wings back and forth to Europe. No sweat, except for the C-5s. They were all water injected A models at that time. Great airframe, but grossly overloaded. I will never forget the cool fall morning that we took off from Pease at 272,000 pounds and thumped the departure end arresting cable with the mains. Two mile take-off rolls got to be routine. Thank god those old J57s were reliable.

User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 9527 times:

Quoting TaxPilot (Reply 7):
Great airplane, but we thought it was old when I flew it 1975-80.

If you thought it was old , I had to go to K.I. sawyer after I left Iceland in 92 to work A models. I first thought I got stationed at the Smithsonian, with the steam gauges and the big klystron tube for the weather radar. If you into a KC-135R cockpit now it is hard to figure out which is which now. Except for the flap gauges and SAI everything has changed.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineIrish251 From Ireland, joined Nov 2004, 982 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 9510 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 4):
Yes, I know the B-52 design is still around, but the first KC-135, production airplane #1, 55-3118, built in 1955, is still flying in the USAF

55-3118 is preserved at McConnell AFB, having been withdrawn from use in 1996.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9507 times:

Quoting Irish251 (Reply 9):
55-3118 is preserved at McConnell AFB, having been withdrawn from use in 1996.

Are you sure? I could be wrong, but I thought she is assigned to the KSANG at Topka as a KC-135R?


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9499 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
Are you sure? I could be wrong, but I thought she is assigned to the KSANG at Topka as a KC-135R?

Ill bet you a bottle of Johnny Walker Blue it has a telephone pole stuck up its butt 55-3118 sitting gate gaurd at McConnell. I think they stuck a boom back on it too.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 9492 times:

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 11):
Johnny Walker Blue

???, LOL

So, is she still in the KC-135A configueration? I know there is one KC-135A on gate guard duty at Dyess AFB, TX, but I don't know her tail number. I will check again to find out how many of the 1955 models are still flying. It does make sense to retire these airplanes as none were built with the upper deck fuel tank in the tail, thus they carried some 14,000lbs less of fuel than the later airplanes.


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 9481 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 12):
1955 models are still flying

55-3118 when it was still flying was in a Ec-135K configuration also serving as CINCTAC and later CINCACC acft. When the 8th ADCS disbanded here at Tinker about 1996 the acft was used by the 89th for about 3 months while some of there 707's were going thru heavy d check and also it was loaned out to speckled trout . Iam sure that no 55 or 56 models 135's never made it to R model status, I think maybe some of them were converted to E models. There wings were different from the 57 thru 64 models. I remember when we had to jack a 55/56 model for a full gear retraction it had to a total defuel to 0 fuel weight. The 57/64 models I think we had to get it under 50k fuel weight. When I was at K.I. Sawyer we one 56 model that we used as a can bird alot and only flew it every 30 days to prevent the dreaded hanger queen status with paper work trail that followed. We were being told then to take care of our 62/63 A models back then in 1992. Then in 1993 we were told to shutdown Oct 1993 and we sent many a pristine A model to the bone yard, ALot of our 62/63 models are still in the desert.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 9468 times:

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 13):
Then in 1993 we were told to shutdown Oct 1993 and we sent many a pristine A model to the bone yard, ALot of our 62/63 models are still in the desert.

Currently, there are about 68 KC-135As in flyable storage at ARMARC. In the late 1990s a few were sold by FMS to Turkey and Indonesia, they were converted to KC-135Rs before delivery.


User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3757 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9461 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
Currently, there are about 68 KC-135As in flyable storage at ARMARC.

They need to use those for airshows, so people can hear those loud J57's. Big grin


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 9363 times:

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 15):
They need to use those for airshows, so people can hear those loud J57's.

Ahhhh, the sound of freedom.


User currently offlineJAM747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 550 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 9172 times:

Have any KC-135 or 707 tankers been converted back to civilian use such as in cargo? The reason I ask is because in a recent Aircraft Illustrated issue there was an article about some Italian 707 tankers. I quote from the article.

" The three remaining Boeing 707 T/T of the Italian AF (AMI) are currently sitting forlornly at Pratica di Mare awaiting the outcome of talks with Boeing and Alenia over a new maintenance contract.The aircraft have not flown since mid-January leaving the AMI with no tanker capability following the delay to the first KC-767A. The current maintenance contract was up for renewal at the start of 2006. The italian KC-767 deal included the return of the four B707s to Boeing with the first having been handed over in December 2005. It is currently at Alenia's Naples facility awaiting a new life in the civilian market." Paul van den Hurk/Phodocu.

The last sentence is the reason for my question.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9139 times:

Quoting JAM747 (Reply 17):
Have any KC-135 or 707 tankers been converted back to civilian use such as in cargo? The reason I ask is because in a recent Aircraft Illustrated issue there was an article about some Italian 707 tankers. I quote from the article.

" The three remaining Boeing 707 T/T of the Italian AF (AMI) are currently sitting forlornly at Pratica di Mare awaiting the outcome of talks with Boeing and Alenia over a new maintenance contract.The aircraft have not flown since mid-January leaving the AMI with no tanker capability following the delay to the first KC-767A. The current maintenance contract was up for renewal at the start of 2006. The italian KC-767 deal included the return of the four B707s to Boeing with the first having been handed over in December 2005. It is currently at Alenia's Naples facility awaiting a new life in the civilian market." Paul van den Hurk/Phodocu.

While there really is no restriction for the sale of KC-135s declaired excess to the government, I doubt any will ever end up in cilivan hands (unless they can be used as fire fighting tankers). The KC-135 would not make an economical cilivan freighter.

Now the Italian B-707TTs do have the longer fuselage (compared to the KC-135), as all were originally B-707-300B/-320Bs. They may still have a life as frighters. But, it doesn't sound like Boeing is in much of a hurray to take these airplanes.


User currently offlineDc8jet From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 326 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9105 times:

I had not heard about any KC-135s going to Indonesia. Do you have any more info?

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 9073 times:

Quoting Dc8jet (Reply 19):
I had not heard about any KC-135s going to Indonesia. Do you have any more info?

Me bad..... Those KC-135As (converted to R) went to Singapore.


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9021 times:

Quoting JAM747 (Reply 17):
The current maintenance contract was up for renewal at the start of 2006. The italian KC-767 deal included the return of the four B707s to Boeing with the first having been handed over in December 2005

Sounds like another diobolical Boeing plot to make money, I think it is Boeing policy to get any countrys AF 707's mx contract, get the acft in a Boeing facility, tear it apart then say it needs a major repair. With it being in pieces the country AF leaders are in a dilemma pay big bucks more than the acft is worth. But Boeing says it has deal for you, upgrade for the 767 or the 757 and we will make you a deal plus we do the heavy mx for 10 years. After 10 years Boeing washes its hands because the corrision problems and the normal aches and pains of 10 years of military use, which means it can't be assured to complete a heavy D check in 90 days and to make a profit by running into unplanned problems. "Maintenance Happens"

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20):
Me bad..... Those KC-135As (converted to R) went to Singapore.

2 KC-135A's that I crewed at K.I.Sawyer are now in foreign colors, 63-8009 is now a R model flying for the Singapore AF and 58-0110 is with the Turkish AF. Saw 8009 here at Tinker going through depot for FMS, still had my name on the side of her before being sent to Kansas for R models conversion then to McConnell to train Singaporian Aircrews.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineMohavewolfpup From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 8900 times:

sorry for the bump, but I would rather post here then litter the forums with a new one.

In the movie "the perfect storm" they show a KC-135 flying in to help refuel a helicopter, but the pilots of the helicopter can't. the fuel hook up hanging off the wing (sorry, it looks like a giant condom/parachute blowing around, and well you can guess the rest!) kept blowing around in the hurricane. In a recent "join teh armed forces!!!" spam that is on the air, I saw a guy talking about "i fuel aircraft" and showed one inserting it's fueler probe directly into the tanker, not a device off the wing.

was this hollywood bs to overblow and make the scene more dramatic (the helicopter did wipe out from low fuel, at least in the movie) or is it the truth? if it was true, why was this design used? seems hazardous compared to the more stationary fueling operation now.


User currently offlineN911ME From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 8878 times:

Quoting Mohavewolfpup (Reply 22):
In the movie "the perfect storm" they show a KC-135 flying in to help refuel a helicopter, but the pilots of the helicopter can't.

That's not a KC-135 - it's an HC-130 from the NYANG, as is the HH-60G refueling from it.

The booms going directly into the aircraft are USAF tankers configured for refueling USAF fixed-wing aircraft, and can be reconfigured to refuel aircraft with refueling probes (USN/USAF/USMC/USA) - also known as the 'hose-and-drogue'.


User currently offlineMohavewolfpup From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 8839 times:

Quoting N911ME (Reply 23):
That's not a KC-135 - it's an HC-130 from the NYANG, as is the HH-60G refueling from it.

The booms going directly into the aircraft are USAF tankers configured for refueling USAF fixed-wing aircraft, and can be reconfigured to refuel aircraft with refueling probes (USN/USAF/USMC/USA) - also known as the 'hose-and-drogue'.

So that design does exist having the parachute thingie off the wing of the fueler? still seems like a odd design to have in case of high winds, etc. Granted it's not everyday you are fueling a helio in a hurricane, but still :p the other seems like a more solid design, but could also be hazardous I would think since both planes are locked together at that point.


25 N911ME : Yes, that design exists - you'll find it mainly on USN aircraft, as regular fleet types can have refueling ("Buddy") pods attached (as in the case of
26 KC135TopBoom : Neither the KC-135 or the KC-10 can refuel heliocopters, even using the wing tip refueling pods. They cannot fly slow enough, and are to heavy for the
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic A Tribute To The KC-135
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Changes The Usaf Make To The KC-135E TF-33 posted Fri Sep 15 2006 02:03:34 by 747400sp
What Happened To This KC-135!?!? posted Sat Jun 14 2003 04:12:14 by SWA TPA
Airbus Plant In The U.S. For KC-135 Repacement. posted Sat Sep 24 2005 02:24:14 by 747400sp
KC-135 Turns 51 And No One Noticed? posted Thu Sep 13 2007 18:53:44 by KC135TopBoom
Avro-Vulcan XH558 Back To The Sky posted Thu Aug 16 2007 21:22:48 by MadameConcorde
Whatever Happended To The Mirage III NG? posted Mon Jul 16 2007 10:25:53 by RJAF
Applying To The Airlines With Helicopter Time posted Mon May 7 2007 20:22:37 by CX747
C-17, KC-135, C-130 & B-52 Production List posted Sat May 5 2007 21:56:24 by BDLGUY
KC-135 Lands With Refueling Boom Down posted Sat Apr 28 2007 02:34:48 by AirTranTUS
Are KC-135's Doing Former C-141 Missions? posted Tue Apr 17 2007 22:50:48 by T56A15

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format