Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Has A Usaf KC-767 Stored?  
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6745 times:

Apparently Boeing has a KC-767 already built for the USAF. It is stored at PAE without engines. Is this an aircraft from the original USAF KC-767 lease deal from 2003?

Will it become the prototype test airplane? The airplane is listed as a B-767-200EZC, indicating it is a combi version. Since it is not the new B-767-200LRF Boeing is now offering to the USAF, it can become a USAF test aircraft later, and not part of the USAF 179 tanker order.

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/767deliveries800-999.htm

It is the first B-767 listed.

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineOroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 911 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6664 times:

They wouldnt need to use it as a prototype as the KC-767 is already flying, for other countries. USAF will be getting the KC-767Adv (dont think that is the actual name), with alot of upgrades and improvements to the basic 767.

::edit::

You already know all that jive Big grin

[Edited 2007-04-21 07:37:02]

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6504 times:

Even though the USAF will use a lot of data from the Italian and Japanese KC-767 testing, I think they will still plan their own test program.

It could become the test to break example. Or perminately become a YKC-767 and used in other USAF test programs, too, much like the NC/NKC-135s are now.


User currently offlineAeroweanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1607 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6324 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boeing has announced that the KC-767 now being offered to the USAF is sufficiently different from the 767-200EZ built for the lease deal that they won't finish the -200EZ airframe. For one thing, KC-767 specific structural mods will be performed on the Everett line and the -200EZ lacks them, as they were planning on doing the mods in Wichita, much like the Italian and Japanese airframes. My bet is that the -200EZ will be scrapped. A similar question hangs over the 767-400ER airframe ordered by the USAF for the E-10A program. Now that the E-10A is cancelled and the airframe is in production, it too might be scrapped or flown directly to AMARC upon completion.

User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3390 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6266 times:

It would be silly to scrap a mostly complete airframe that is new, its very possible to convert it to something useful given the high resale for any low hour used frame, much less a new build. Even 767's are worth a fair bit.

767F's are the cats meow in their class even after the A330F if you have lower density cargo. Its a good bit more efficient as long as you cargo is 8 lbs per cubic foot or less even high density cargo the 767 is a champ with its higher % of MTOW as payload.


User currently offlineAeroweanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1607 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6227 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
It would be silly to scrap a mostly complete airframe that is new, its very possible to convert it to something useful given the high resale for any low hour used frame, much less a new build. Even 767's are worth a fair bit.

For starters, it was built with a -400ER flight deck, which is not civil certified on the -200. A one-off certification would be very expensive and ripping it all out and putting in a -200 flight deck would also be very expensive. While it might seem simple to find a use for the airframe, the reality is far different.

-200 and -400:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Magnus Trippler
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Josh Akbar



Boeing was faced with a similar problem regarding 747 line number 400. It was on order for the Imperial Iran Air Force when the Iranian Revolution happened. The airframe was stored at Everett for four years. There were too many IIAF specific systems in the aircraft to allow it to easily be sold commercially. Finally, Boeing swung a deal with Northwest Airlines and the aircraft was rebuilt as N630US, a freighter. I have been told by a friend who has crewed on it that internally it is non-standard.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Brendan Vanderwerf


[Edited 2007-04-23 02:36:49]

User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6150 times:

Actually, a -400 style flight deck has been retrofitted into the 767-200's that ABX aquired from Delta.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Freight-Dawg - Airside Photography



User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6127 times:

Quoting Aeroweanie (Reply 3):
For one thing, KC-767 specific structural mods will be performed on the Everett line and the -200EZ lacks them, as they were planning on doing the mods in Wichita,

Isn't it that a development frame doesn't have to be the exact same specifications as the final product. Couldn't they do the structural mods and fly it as a systems testbed on a test registration?

Quoting Aeroweanie (Reply 5):

For starters, it was built with a -400ER flight deck, which is not civil certified on the -200. A one-off certification would be very expensive

Would those still apply if the frame is to be converted to a private business jet? The certification costs could be offset a bit if the frame is bought at a substantial discount.

Quoting Aeroweanie (Reply 3):
A similar question hangs over the 767-400ER airframe ordered by the USAF for the E-10A program. Now that the E-10A is cancelled and the airframe is in production, it too might be scrapped or flown directly to AMARC upon completion.

It is conceivable that it could be part of the technology demonstrator which received the $256M funding last December.....

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/.../e10a-shes-dead-jim/index.php#more

Quote:
"Back in December 2006, Northrop Grumman received a $256 million contract covering design and analysis of the E-10A Technology Development Program (TDP) through Initial Design Review."


Thread here.....

E-10A (767-400) To Be Delivered At End Of '07 (by NYC777 Feb 2 2007 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5579 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Thread starter):
Apparently Boeing has a KC-767 already built for the USAF. It is stored at PAE without engines.

A photo turns-up.....

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/index.asp

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
its very possible to convert it to something useful given the high resale for any low hour used frame, much less a new build

For now, it will be used as a stand-in in the rehearsal for the 787 rollout.  Smile



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5565 times:

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 6):
Actually, a -400 style flight deck has been retrofitted into the 767-200's that ABX aquired from Delta.

was that conversion done by ABX or DAL?



"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 850 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5542 times:

A 767 Tanker as dress rehearsal for 787...

With Trent 1000 engines I guess?

Micke//  Confused



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5520 times:

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 10):
A 767 Tanker as dress rehearsal for 787...

With Trent 1000 engines I guess?

Isn't it (the KC-767, or B-767-200C) a lot shorter than a B-787-800?


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3390 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5421 times:

dress rehearsals are more about not running the director of engineering over with the plane or other "social" concerns than with working out the physical details. 767 seems like a good choice given that I doubt there is any 777 laying around to play with, and a 737 would just not be remotely correct for scale. One hopes they got some interns with tapemeasures out to check that the 787 fits through the doors and the like... years ago.

User currently offlineYanqui67 From Puerto Rico, joined Jan 2005, 508 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5375 times:

Quoting Cancidas (Reply 9):
was that conversion done by ABX or DAL?

Those conversions were done in Israel by Israel Aerospace Industries. They do a great job on those ex DAL 767-200s.


User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5243 times:

Quoting Yanqui67 (Reply 13):
Those conversions were done in Israel by Israel Aerospace Industries. They do a great job on those ex DAL 767-200s.

i actually meant who desired the conversion done. by what you said i take to mean that the conversion was done after ABX aquired the airplane.



"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 4362 times:

Quoting Cancidas (Reply 14):
i actually meant who desired the conversion done. by what you said i take to mean that the conversion was done after ABX aquired the airplane.

I believe that conversion (converting the B-767-200 avionics to the B-767-400 standard) was done by DL as part of the purchase contract. The question is, did this modification require an FAA Flight check and certification? I believe DL provides B-767-400 training to the ABX crews in thei B-767-400 simulator, too.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Boeing Has A Usaf KC-767 Stored?
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...
Who Selected P&W For Usaf KC-767? posted Wed Jul 27 2005 23:54:26 by AirRyan
Boeing Gets Usaf 767 Tanker Deal posted Fri May 23 2003 20:35:19 by United777
Pratt & Whitney Selected To Supply Engines KC-767 posted Tue Mar 13 2007 22:12:56 by Keesje
Kc 767 posted Thu Feb 15 2007 03:38:48 by Patches
Boeing Has Lock On $8b In Military Contracts posted Wed Aug 16 2006 23:26:11 by RAPCON
Boeing Tells Usaf The C-17 Line Is Closing posted Thu Jul 13 2006 18:19:38 by Revelation
Buffet Problems For Italian KC-767 posted Mon May 22 2006 09:56:35 by Scbriml
KC-767 posted Sat Apr 8 2006 17:46:40 by AirbusA346
KC-767 Vs KC-30? Try KC-787 Vs. KC-50 posted Wed Dec 14 2005 02:38:41 by AirRyan
USAF KC-10 Extender @ GRU.....Why? posted Sat Aug 6 2005 16:01:10 by BrunoSBGR

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format