Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2827 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Looks like Boeing is showing off the 777F to the Air Force
RC135X From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 161 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2783 times:
Any idea why it would go to WRB? Hard to imagine that "decision makers" would be there, and the base is the logistics center for C-5s, C-17s, C-130s, and F-15s.
Unless Boeing is making a long-shot pitch that the 777F as a KC-135 replacement would work just fine at a base that just lost its long-standing KC-135 unit.
KC-135A, A(RT), D, E, E(RT), Q, R, EC-135A, C, G, L, RC-135S, U, V, W, X, TC-135S, W
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2547 times:
Quoting RC135X (Reply 1): Any idea why it would go to WRB? Hard to imagine that "decision makers" would be there, and the base is the logistics center for C-5s, C-17s, C-130s, and F-15s.
It could be a future logistics center for the Air Force models of the 777? Tankers come to mind here.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2546 times:
Quoting RC135X (Reply 1): Unless Boeing is making a long-shot pitch that the 777F as a KC-135 replacement would work just fine at a base that just lost its long-standing KC-135 unit.
Might Boeing be making an early pitch for a KC-10A replacement? Or might they be making a pitch for a new air force cargo plane; something faster than the C-17s?
Gsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2541 times:
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 3): Might Boeing be making an early pitch for a KC-10A replacement? Or might they be making a pitch for a new air force cargo plane; something faster than the C-17s?
That would be interesting. Wonder how they will get the M1A2 on and off the the T7?
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3248 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2514 times:
Quoting Gsosbee (Reply 4): That would be interesting. Wonder how they will get the M1A2 on and off the the T7?
M1A2 - ain't happening.... Now Deuce and a half trucks and smaller you can get in and out the side door of a KC-10 or 747 with a Tunner or elevator loader. Looks hard but it's not really.
Same would be true for the 777F I presume....
edit: grammar
[Edited 2008-08-09 15:32:18]
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
Par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2430 times:
Quoting RC135X (Reply 1): Unless Boeing is making a long-shot pitch that the 777F as a KC-135 replacement would work just fine at a base that just lost its long-standing KC-135 unit.
If this is about the tanker deal, then good for Boeing.
If the Air Force now wants to give credit for a larger a/c, Boeing has three choices.
1. Do what EADS and its partner did and threaten to withdraw if the parameters are not changed.
2.Withdraw because your existing a/c is too small based on the new requirements
3. Proposal a larger a/c, force the competition to do the same, A340??
If we have civilian spotters it would be interesting to see if they are doing taxi test on the ramps and taxiways, trying out various hangers to prove to themselves that the a/c is a suitable replacement in terms of footprint, then when they submit their new bid, they can show some facts to back up their claim.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2418 times:
Quoting Par13del (Reply 6): 3. Proposal a larger a/c, force the competition to do the same, A340??
First generation A340s (-200 and -300) wouldn't have enough power, to my way of thinking, to serve well in the tanker role. -500? Perhaps. Would -600 be too much airplane for the tanker role?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
