JayinKitsap
Posts: 1398
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sat May 11, 2019 2:46 am

The KC-46 has been certified to fuel the F-35, but hardly any deliveries of late.

https://defenseworld.net/news/24757/Boe ... NY01zbYo3E
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 10:50 am

Three more deliveries :

May 17th 2019, LN# 1154, Variable # VH036, MSN# 34091, BuNo. 17-46036, Hex Code AE5E11, Tail# 76036, CallSign: KANZA01, BFI-IAB
May 18th 2019, LN# 1131, Variable # VH025, MSN# 41863, BuNo. 17-46025, Hex Code AE5E06, Tail# 76025, CallSign: EXXON04, BFI-LTS
May 18th 2019, LN# 1145, Variable # VH032, MSN# 34111, BuNo. 17-46032, Hex Code AE5E0D, Tail# 76032, CallSign: EXXON05, BFI-LTS

See also : https://twitter.com/BoeingDefense/statu ... 3228793858
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11100
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Wed May 29, 2019 11:35 pm

When will the first KC-46 be delivered to PSM for the NHANG? Will it be a new delivery directly from Boeing, or will it be a transferred airplane from IAB or LTS?
 
Runway28L
Posts: 1744
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu May 30, 2019 9:26 pm

kc135topboom wrote:
When will the first KC-46 be delivered to PSM for the NHANG? Will it be a new delivery directly from Boeing, or will it be a transferred airplane from IAB or LTS?

I read that it is planned for late summer or early fall and the frames would come directly from Boeing. Though with these types of transitions, it entirely depends on when the base completes the necessary mods and is ready for the aircraft.

Some sources involving the progress of the transition:
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your ... rce=clavis
https://www.157arw.ang.af.mil/News/Arti ... -at-pease/
https://www.157arw.ang.af.mil/News/Arti ... e-trainer/
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11100
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sun Jun 02, 2019 12:37 am

Thanks, Habu
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4239
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:47 pm

747classic wrote:
Three more deliveries :

May 17th 2019, LN# 1154, Variable # VH036, MSN# 34091, BuNo. 17-46036, Hex Code AE5E11, Tail# 76036, CallSign: KANZA01, BFI-IAB
May 18th 2019, LN# 1131, Variable # VH025, MSN# 41863, BuNo. 17-46025, Hex Code AE5E06, Tail# 76025, CallSign: EXXON04, BFI-LTS
May 18th 2019, LN# 1145, Variable # VH032, MSN# 34111, BuNo. 17-46032, Hex Code AE5E0D, Tail# 76032, CallSign: EXXON05, BFI-LTS

See also : https://twitter.com/BoeingDefense/statu ... 3228793858


And about a month later, still no more deliveries...
The last of the famous international playboys
 
Ozair
Posts: 4073
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:09 pm

Spacepope wrote:
747classic wrote:
Three more deliveries :

May 17th 2019, LN# 1154, Variable # VH036, MSN# 34091, BuNo. 17-46036, Hex Code AE5E11, Tail# 76036, CallSign: KANZA01, BFI-IAB
May 18th 2019, LN# 1131, Variable # VH025, MSN# 41863, BuNo. 17-46025, Hex Code AE5E06, Tail# 76025, CallSign: EXXON04, BFI-LTS
May 18th 2019, LN# 1145, Variable # VH032, MSN# 34111, BuNo. 17-46032, Hex Code AE5E0D, Tail# 76032, CallSign: EXXON05, BFI-LTS

See also : https://twitter.com/BoeingDefense/statu ... 3228793858


And about a month later, still no more deliveries...

I feel like we have done this before...

USAF still finding FOD in Boeing KC-46 and expects more

The US Air Force (USAF) continues to find foreign object debris (FOD) inside the Boeing KC-46A Pegasus in-flight refuelling tanker, including loose material found this week, and it expects to discover objects for the foreseeable future.

FOD found inside new KC-46As delivered to the USAF is a result of cultural problems, said Will Roper, USAF assistant secretary of the air force for acquisition, technology and logistics, at the show. The service is finding tools, rubbish and left-over parts such as loose nuts during inspections, he said.

...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ex-459031/

It really shouldn't be this hard.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11100
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:03 am

Boeing, get your act together :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :talktothehand: :talktothehand: :talktothehand:
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1398
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:46 am

kc135topboom wrote:
Boeing, get your act together :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :talktothehand: :talktothehand: :talktothehand:


It really shouldn't be that hard. Have a couple 767 hangers, bring in the KC's that are the most complete, vacuum and clean every space one by one, also finishing out any punchlist items as you go, then get it checked out for the acceptance flights.

The crazy part is they clearly have been working a later group of the production, models that first flew after June 2018, but not the latest models either. Have they not done the rework on the ones still to fly. There are 16 that have had their first flight but not delivered yet.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3946
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:01 pm

One of the things that make FOD cleanup hard is the anticorrosion material sprayed in the fuselage.. especially the area below the waterline. anything that falls in it while its fresh is stuck so vacuuming doesn't work. likewise if it falls in a stringer/skin joint while the compound is still pliable... I recall one instance where we had the production line pull up a door sill because the drain was blocked, we scraped up about a pound of debris bound together with the compound..
 
EK77WNH
Posts: 184
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:42 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:49 pm

I think I read somewhere that Pease would have a public 'open house' of sorts upon the plane's arrival. Based on a late 2019 arrival of the first one, an event in Spring 2020 seems likely.
Next Trip:
JAL 7-8 BOS-NRT-BOS, 787-9
September
 
Max Q
Posts: 7548
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu Jun 20, 2019 10:03 am

Moose135 wrote:
They didn't have the inside open to the public, but I did get a good look around the outside and spent about 10 minutes talking with one of the pilots who flew it in. He came out of R-model -135s, and loves the -46.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image



Great pictures Moose

I’m not surprised he likes flying it, I flew the
762 at Continental and they were great aircraft, masses of power and very responsive, the KC 46 only weighs a little more but has even more thrust, I imagine it’s a delight



After looking at your pictures more closely I’m surprised at how large the fairing with the cameras for the remote boomer is


As big and ‘draggy’ as it is Boeing would have been better off building a proper boom operator station there instead, probably wouldn’t have been much bigger and they would have avoided all the technical issues with IFR using CCTV
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2905
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu Jun 20, 2019 1:34 pm

Max Q wrote:
After looking at your pictures more closely I’m surprised at how large the fairing with the cameras for the remote boomer is


Interesting. I suppose by the time the air flow gets back there, the boundary layer is such that the impact of that pillbox is not as bad as one would think. Otherwise they would have done a better job of fairing it out.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4239
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:43 pm

Didn't see it reported here, but it looks like Boeing actually managed to squeeze one out the door in June. According to the spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 2121076296

#23 delivered on June 29. Based on the color scheme on the sheet, 29 might be next.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:07 am

Spacepope wrote:
Didn't see it reported here, but it looks like Boeing actually managed to squeeze one out the door in June. According to the spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 2121076296

#23 delivered was at June 29. Based on the color scheme on the sheet, 29 might be next.


The next delivery at July 19th : #37, see : https://tykesaeroblog.blogspot.com/

Delivery flight BFI-IAB with callsign MDUSA08, see : https://flightaware.com/live/flight/MDU ... /KBFI/KIAB

Aircraft data : L/N 1156 C/N 41984 B767-2LKC (N5511Y) 17-46037 USAF KC-46A (VH037) LRIP3, #14/15, tail 76037, F/F 02/24/2019.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
brindabella
Posts: 569
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:04 pm

747classic wrote:
Spacepope wrote:
Didn't see it reported here, but it looks like Boeing actually managed to squeeze one out the door in June. According to the spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 2121076296

#23 delivered was at June 29. Based on the color scheme on the sheet, 29 might be next.


The next delivery at July 19th : #37, see : https://tykesaeroblog.blogspot.com/

Delivery flight BFI-IAB with callsign MDUSA08, see : https://flightaware.com/live/flight/MDU ... /KBFI/KIAB

Aircraft data : L/N 1156 C/N 41984 B767-2LKC (N5511Y) 17-46037 USAF KC-46A (VH037) LRIP3, #14/15, tail 76037, F/F 02/24/2019.


This USAF thing restricting deliveries to 1/month still going on?

cheers
Billy
 
trex8
Posts: 5327
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:58 am

Things arent getting any better for Boeing

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/07/air ... rom-kc-46/
 
Max Q
Posts: 7548
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:34 am

Seems like deleting a boom operator station with a window was a bad idea
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 920
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:40 am

Max Q wrote:
Seems like deleting a boom operator station with a window was a bad idea


I don't see how that would fix the FOD issue.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:03 am

Max Q wrote:
Seems like deleting a boom operator station with a window was a bad idea


Several earlier built tankers use the remote boom operator station : KDC10, A330MRT, KC767, KC767J, IAI 767 converted tanker.
Only Boeing + USAF tried to invent the wheel again.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2905
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:14 am

The FOD issue is workmanship related. We have seen this before from Boeing when they push the work force to meet schedule.

The boom issue seems to me like someone was trying to tweak the design to prove efficiency and messed up some calculation along the way.

Can't really say the camera issue could have been predicted. Glare at a specific angle at a specific time of day is one of those configuration specific thing you really don't find out until flight test. Who's, to say why those older systems doesn't have a glare problem? Maybe those old camera are not sensitive enough for the glare to show up. That would be irony. :mrgreen:

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:08 pm

trex8 wrote:
Things arent getting any better for Boeing

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/07/air ... rom-kc-46/


1) It's not news: we knew weeks if not months ago that DoD would withhold large amounts of money per plane till the optics issue was resolved

2) The article ignores the real good news from Boeing's perspective: DoD is actually accepting KC46s so finally some cash is coming in for the program.

Clearly disappointing that the withholding is needed, but also nice to free up space taken by parked KC46s to allow 737s and 777Xs to be parked in their place! :biggrin:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8672
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:17 pm

747classic wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Seems like deleting a boom operator station with a window was a bad idea


Several earlier built tankers use the remote boom operator station : KDC10, A330MRT, KC767, KC767J, IAI 767 converted tanker.
Only Boeing + USAF tried to invent the wheel again.

I'm more inclined to believe its mostly the USAF, after all the government types also screwed up the last Helo for POTUS to the tune of billions and what do they have in common...both were off the shelf designs already in production, really hard to believe that the OEM's who made the original product do not know how to make the product.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:39 pm

par13del wrote:
really hard to believe that the OEM's who made the original product do not know how to make the product.

In the old days Boeing used to build a green frame and fly it elsewhere (Wichita I believe) to militarize it.
Now they do it all at KPAE and it seems the workers they use are not up to the same standards.
The whole wiring problem that ate up most of the development budget margin was due to commercial guys not understanding military standards.
Then we had the infamous issue where the wrong chemicals were put into the tanks, my guess is that one too came from rookie mistakes.
Bean counters think they've cracked the code on saving money, but in the end they keep proving things would go a lot better if they got out of the loop.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1398
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:22 pm

The vision system is Boeing's to fix, the boom not able to handle A-10's and some others is the Air Force's problem. It specified in the RFP the minimum force for the connection to the plane, it was like 1.5 x what the A-10 can push. All of the planes that have been certified to date for transfer have a minimum force to connect above the RFP.

Cobham decided that their refueling pods did not need to be FAA certified, but the whole plane including the pods was required by the RFP to be FAA certified. I saw in the recent news Cobham has been bought by a private equity firm, that article noted Cobham paid something like $63M to Boeing for the delays. That is the longest lead item for acceptance.
 
giblets
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:34 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sat Jul 27, 2019 12:29 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
The vision system is Boeing's to fix, the boom not able to handle A-10's and some others is the Air Force's problem. It specified in the RFP the minimum force for the connection to the plane, it was like 1.5 x what the A-10 can push. All of the planes that have been certified to date for transfer have a minimum force to connect above the RFP.

Cobham decided that their refueling pods did not need to be FAA certified, but the whole plane including the pods was required by the RFP to be FAA certified. I saw in the recent news Cobham has been bought by a private equity firm, that article noted Cobham paid something like $63M to Boeing for the delays. That is the longest lead item for acceptance.


Anyone know why boeing swapped the Smiths pods they used on the Italian tankers (that took years of delays to resolve), to new Chobham pods that are taking ages of delays to resolve).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
146, ATR72, Q400, Saab 340, PA-46 Jetprop, Jetstream, E175/195, 707/727/737/747/757/767/777, DC-3/9/10, MD-11/80, A300/310/319/320/321/330/340/350/380 Tristar, BAC 1-11, Trident, Chipmunk, Bell 206/222, Chinook, Puma, Cessna 172, Fokker 70, 100, SRN4!
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8672
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sat Jul 27, 2019 1:52 pm

I'm betting something to do with an Air Force requirement, would not be shocked if it was related to trying to have a US equivalent to whatever the Europeans have on their A330, after all, that is the tanker they wanted right?
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 3182
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sun Jul 28, 2019 8:27 am

par13del wrote:
I'm betting something to do with an Air Force requirement, would not be shocked if it was related to trying to have a US equivalent to whatever the Europeans have on their A330, after all, that is the tanker they wanted right?

I'm suspecting that as Smith Aerospace was bought by GE, the pods are discontinued now by GE.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sun Jul 28, 2019 9:59 am

ThePointblank wrote:
par13del wrote:
I'm betting something to do with an Air Force requirement, would not be shocked if it was related to trying to have a US equivalent to whatever the Europeans have on their A330, after all, that is the tanker they wanted right?

I'm suspecting that as Smith Aerospace was bought by GE, the pods are discontinued now by GE.


Yes, the production of 767 pods was discontinued , because no WARP order was received for the KC-46A program.

Actually the pylons +pods were constructed by Hamble aerospace, see :
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ ... ity-Supply.

The WARPS installed at the KC767A for the Italian airforce were designed by Smiths Aerospace (now : GE Aviation Systems), max transfer rate of 480 USgal/min.

See : https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ ... onstration

And : http://aviationphotodigest.com/aeronaut ... -italiana/

Hamble aerospace was (together with Smith Aerospace) bought by GE, but is still active in building parts for several aircraft.





Cobham supplies the KC-46A WARPS and the installed RP-910E-75 WARP's are based upon Cobham’s 5th generation 900E electric architecture (A330 MRTT, etc), the shape is optimized for KC-46A and the transfer rate is 400+ USgal/min.

See : https://www.cobham.com/mission-systems/ ... lling-pods
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Buckeyetech
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 1:11 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Sun Jul 28, 2019 9:28 pm

Great 360 degree view of the flight deck at Oshkosh. https://www.facebook.com/500309548/post ... 05&sfns=mo
B-52H, C-141C, C-5A, C-17A
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3825
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jul 30, 2019 7:32 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
Ozair wrote:
Navman101 wrote:
The KC-10s do not need to be replaced "basically now". Almost all of the Extenders have less than 30,000 airframe hours on them presently, and it's a fact that companies such as FedEx have flown DC/MD-10s to beyond 75,000 hrs. So they have plenty of airframe life left on them. It is also nonsense to suggest that a single KC-10, which were built in the 1980s should be replaced before all the KC-135s, which were built in the late 1950s and early-mid 1960s is replaced. It is also true that the KC-10 is the most sought after tanker in any contingency situation due to its massive fuel load and ability to stay on station for hours refueling multiple heavy aircraft.

I agree there is no imperative to replace the KC-10s due to fatigue reasons.

The USAF though has previously, and will almost certainly do so again, indicate they want to retire the KC-10 fleet for budgetary reasons. It is quite possible that the KC-135s will outlast the KC-10s only for the fact the fleets sizes are so dissimilar that to remove the whole KC-10 fleet will provide a more significant budget improvement to O&M. Nothing against the aircraft itself but everything to do with operating small fleets of aircraft (comparatively) and efficient use of USAF funds.

There is an impetus to replace the KC-10's because it's getting increasingly difficult to support the KC-10's systems as times goes on. The DC-10 is becoming increasingly scarce in civilian operations as the fleet size shrinks (the USAF operates more KC-10's than there are DC/MD-10's in civilian hands), which has a very negative effect on parts availability.

doesn't Boeing still supply parts and Drawings for the KC10? and if they don't ? I know good and well where they can get them. United's Tech Library @ SFO
 
Ozair
Posts: 4073
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:41 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
Ozair wrote:
I agree there is no imperative to replace the KC-10s due to fatigue reasons.

The USAF though has previously, and will almost certainly do so again, indicate they want to retire the KC-10 fleet for budgetary reasons. It is quite possible that the KC-135s will outlast the KC-10s only for the fact the fleets sizes are so dissimilar that to remove the whole KC-10 fleet will provide a more significant budget improvement to O&M. Nothing against the aircraft itself but everything to do with operating small fleets of aircraft (comparatively) and efficient use of USAF funds.

There is an impetus to replace the KC-10's because it's getting increasingly difficult to support the KC-10's systems as times goes on. The DC-10 is becoming increasingly scarce in civilian operations as the fleet size shrinks (the USAF operates more KC-10's than there are DC/MD-10's in civilian hands), which has a very negative effect on parts availability.

doesn't Boeing still supply parts and Drawings for the KC10? and if they don't ? I know good and well where they can get them. United's Tech Library @ SFO

The issue is not the technical knowledge or lack of for the airframe. The USAF, based on the aged platforms it flies across its fleet of aircraft, does a very good job of keeping these aircraft in the sky. The issue with the KC-10 is budget O&M, being able to remove a whole airframe makes more of a difference to the budget bottom line than reducing the same number of KC-135s which means the USAF would still have to pay for both fleets. Remove the KC-10 and you eliminate a whole back end maintenance stream, conversion schools and pilot stream etc. Yes the capabilities are different but that isn’t the issue, saving money in O&M is.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 920
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:12 am

Ozair wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
There is an impetus to replace the KC-10's because it's getting increasingly difficult to support the KC-10's systems as times goes on. The DC-10 is becoming increasingly scarce in civilian operations as the fleet size shrinks (the USAF operates more KC-10's than there are DC/MD-10's in civilian hands), which has a very negative effect on parts availability.

doesn't Boeing still supply parts and Drawings for the KC10? and if they don't ? I know good and well where they can get them. United's Tech Library @ SFO

The issue is not the technical knowledge or lack of for the airframe. The USAF, based on the aged platforms it flies across its fleet of aircraft, does a very good job of keeping these aircraft in the sky. The issue with the KC-10 is budget O&M, being able to remove a whole airframe makes more of a difference to the budget bottom line than reducing the same number of KC-135s which means the USAF would still have to pay for both fleets. Remove the KC-10 and you eliminate a whole back end maintenance stream, conversion schools and pilot stream etc. Yes the capabilities are different but that isn’t the issue, saving money in O&M is.


It's literally the same reason airlines like to standardise on as few families as they can get away with. One family for long haul and one for short haul or even just one for everything is more efficient than the perfect sized plane for each route.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:46 pm

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
It's literally the same reason airlines like to standardise on as few families as they can get away with. One family for long haul and one for short haul or even just one for everything is more efficient than the perfect sized plane for each route.

Quite true.

The downside is that a "one size fits all" mentality takes over.

Also the existing fleets get a momentum of their own because a new entrant is not just expected to fill a niche role, but be capable of taking on every role the old fleet could plus what ever new features it adds, and needs to be funded not for the niche role but for the fleet replacement role.

In turn this momentum makes innovation very difficult so stagnation can set in.

Another case in point is the B1. B1A was to fill a niche role (supersonic bomber to replace subsonic B52) but the whole issue of B52 replacement came up so we got subsonic B1B which never got the funding to replace B52 and now we see the momentum of the B52 taking over and the B1B likely the next victim of the next efficiency drive so we lose its unique capabilities in favor of a more economical fleet.

Same argument can be made for F22 vs F15.

Getting the right balance between effectiveness and economy is difficult, yet both matter.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
EK77WNH
Posts: 184
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:42 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:06 pm

A KC-46 is at Pease here in New Hampshire right now. Not sure if it 'belongs' to them or if it's just a loaner for familiarization purposes.
Next Trip:
JAL 7-8 BOS-NRT-BOS, 787-9
September
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:42 pm

747classic wrote:
Spacepope wrote:
Didn't see it reported here, but it looks like Boeing actually managed to squeeze one out the door in June. According to the spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 2121076296

#23 delivered was at June 29. Based on the color scheme on the sheet, 29 might be next.


The next delivery at July 19th : #37, see : https://tykesaeroblog.blogspot.com/

Delivery flight BFI-IAB with callsign MDUSA08, see : https://flightaware.com/live/flight/MDU ... /KBFI/KIAB

Aircraft data : L/N 1156 C/N 41984 B767-2LKC (N5511Y) 17-46037 USAF KC-46A (VH037) LRIP3, #14/15, tail 76037, F/F 02/24/2019.

Your post viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411951&p=21553151#p21525721 says #51 is about to enter the FAL.

Are there any gaps in the sequence, or does this mean 50 KC-46A are already built?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4239
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:15 pm

Revelation wrote:
747classic wrote:
Spacepope wrote:
Didn't see it reported here, but it looks like Boeing actually managed to squeeze one out the door in June. According to the spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 2121076296

#23 delivered was at June 29. Based on the color scheme on the sheet, 29 might be next.


The next delivery at July 19th : #37, see : https://tykesaeroblog.blogspot.com/

Delivery flight BFI-IAB with callsign MDUSA08, see : https://flightaware.com/live/flight/MDU ... /KBFI/KIAB

Aircraft data : L/N 1156 C/N 41984 B767-2LKC (N5511Y) 17-46037 USAF KC-46A (VH037) LRIP3, #14/15, tail 76037, F/F 02/24/2019.

Your post viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411951&p=21553151#p21525721 says #51 is about to enter the FAL.

Are there any gaps in the sequence, or does this mean 50 KC-46A are already built?

Checking that google link I posted above, it looks like no gaps in sequence, so yes, 50 already built and there should have been around 30 delivered by now but, well, you know, Boeing.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:05 pm

Spacepope wrote:
Checking that google link I posted above, it looks like no gaps in sequence, so yes, 50 already built and there should have been around 30 delivered by now but, well, you know, Boeing.

Yes, it seems Boeing is its own worst enemy these days.

On the good news front, they can at least say they've built more tankers than any other tanker currently in production.

On the bad news front, they still haven't delivered as many as the competition, but should do so in a year's time, inshallah.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4239
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:13 pm

Revelation wrote:
Spacepope wrote:
Checking that google link I posted above, it looks like no gaps in sequence, so yes, 50 already built and there should have been around 30 delivered by now but, well, you know, Boeing.

Yes, it seems Boeing is its own worst enemy these days.

On the good news front, they can at least say they've built more tankers than any other tanker currently in production.

On the bad news front, they still haven't delivered as many as the competition, but should do so in a year's time, inshallah.


We'll see how the delivery ramp up happens. They were supposed to be sending 3 per month on their way since last August. I think the current one per month is just so they have enough parking spaces.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1398
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Aug 02, 2019 2:47 am

None delivered in July. There must be something going on backstage, possibly the Air Force doesn't need that many until the boom fix, the cobham wing units, and the vision system are all fixed and installed.
 
User avatar
RobK
Posts: 3595
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:43 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Aug 02, 2019 2:56 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
None delivered in July.


Yes there were. 46045 officially delivered to the tanker program on July 5 and 46037 flew away as noted by 747classic in his post above.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:34 am

The assembly rate of the KC46A has slowed from 1 /month to 1 /two months.
Between each KC-46A one civil 767-300F was built, now between each KC-46A three civil 767-300F are built, see :

L/N 1161 C/N 43633 B767-300F N166FE FEDEX (VT616) “JobEdokat”
L/N 1162 C/N 34087 B767-2LKC 18-46040 USAF KC-46A (VH040) Lot 4, #02/18, tail 86040
L/N 1163 C/N 63099 B767-300F N167FE FEDEX (VT617) “Timya”
L/N 1164 C/N 34088 B767-2LKC 18-46041 USAF KC-46A (VH041) Lot 4, #03/18, tail 86041
L/N 1165 C/N 63100 B767-300F N168FE FEDEX (VT618) “Massimo”
L/N 1166 C/N 34090 B767-2LKC 18-46042 USAF KC-46A (VH042) Lot 4, #04/18, tail 86042
L/N 1167 C/N 63101 B767-300F N169FE FEDEX (VT619) “Nicholas”
L/N 1168 C/N 34092 B767-2LKC 18-46043 USAF KC-46A (VH043) Lot 4, #05/18, tail 86043
L/N 1169 C/N 63102 B767-300F N170FE FEDEX (VT620) “Sienna”
L/N 1170 C/N 34086 B767-2LKC 18-46044 USAF KC-46A (VH044) Lot 4, #05/18, tail 86044
L/N 1171 C/N 63103 B767-300F N172FE FEDEX (VT 621) “Edison”
L/N 1172 C/N 41865 B767-2LKC 18-46045 USAF KC-46A (VH045) Lot 4, #05/18, tail 86045
L/N 1173 C/N 64055 B767-300F N105FE FEDEX (VT622) “Dario”
L/N 1174 C/N 41866 B767-2LKC 18-46046 USAF KC-46A (VH046) Lot 4, #06/18, tail 86046
L/N 1175 C/N 63104 B767-300F N173FE FEDEX (VT623) “Eleanor”
L/N 1176 C/N 41867 B767-2LKC 18-46047 USAF KC-46A (VH047) Lot 4, #07/18, tail 86047
L/N 1177 C/N 63105 B767-300F N174FE FEDEX (VT624) “Javin”
L/N 1178 C/N 34141 B767-2LKC 18-46048 USAF KC-46A (VH048) Lot 4, #08/18, tail 86048
L/N 1179 C/N 64056 B767-300F N296FE FEDEX (VT625) “Sullivan
L/N 1180 C/N 65788 B767-300F N365UP UNITED PARCEL SERVICE (VR293)
L/N 1181 C/N xxxxx B767-2LKC 18-46049 USAF KC-46A (VH049) Lot 4, #09/18, tail 86049
L/N 1182 C/N 63106 B767-300F N175FE FEDEX (VT626) “Ahnya Kailani”
L/N 1183 C/N 63108 B767-300F N177FE FEDEX (VT627)
L/N 1184 C/N xxxxx B767-2LKC 18-46050 USAF KC-46A (VH050) Lot 4, #10/18, tail 86050
L/N 1185 C/N 63107 B767-300F N176FE FEDEX (VT628)
L/N 1186 C/N 65789 B767-300F N366UP UNITED PARCEL SERVICE (VR294)
L/N 1187 C/N 63109 B767-300F N178FE FEDEX (VT629)
L/N 1188 C/N xxxxx B767-2LKC 18-46051 USAF KC-46A (VH051) Lot 4, #11/18, tail 86051

Provisional L/N allocation (registration and MSN subject to change) :

L/N 1189 C/N 63110 B767-300F N179FE FEDEX (VT630) ??
L/N 1190 C/N 65790 B767-300F N367UP UNITED PARCEL SERVICE (VR295)
L/N 1191 C/N 63111 B767-300F N180FE FEDEX (VT631) ??
L/N 1192 C/N xxxxx B767-2LKC 18-46052 USAF KC-46A (VH052) Lot 4, #12/18, tail 86052
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:20 pm

KC-46A Boom Actuator Redesign Cost Set At $55.5 Million, to be payed by USAF.

The Air Force agreed to pay for redesigning and installing a new telescope actuator for the KC-46 refueling boom, and Boeing agreed to finance the redesign and installation of a complaint remote vision system.

Boeing received the $55.5 million contract on Aug. 2 to complete the critical design review of system-level hardware and software for the telescope actuator redesign.

See : https://aviationweek.com/defense/kc-46- ... 55-million
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:27 pm

Seems that Boeing designed the boom to spec but the spec was wrong, in that it resulted in a boom that produces too much force for light aircraft such as the A-10.

Thus the USAF is paying for the correction.

Seems the vision system redesign issues are not resolved (sic), with Boeing still working on a software synthesis approach while the USAF seems dubious about that approach.

Regardless, the vision system does not meet spec, so it is Boeing who is paying for the work.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2905
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:07 pm

Revelation wrote:
with Boeing still working on a software synthesis approach while the USAF seems dubious about that approach.


747classic wrote:
Boeing received the $55.5 million contract on Aug. 2 to complete the critical design review of system-level hardware and software for the telescope actuator redesign.


When we talk about "Critical Design Review" we are typically looking at the end of the design process. So to me it seems like the solution is selected, and the August 2 contract will allow Boeing to complete that phase before engineering is released for the final software fix.

Lookin forward to the result of the flight test.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:27 pm

bikerthai wrote:
Revelation wrote:
with Boeing still working on a software synthesis approach while the USAF seems dubious about that approach.


747classic wrote:
Boeing received the $55.5 million contract on Aug. 2 to complete the critical design review of system-level hardware and software for the telescope actuator redesign.


When we talk about "Critical Design Review" we are typically looking at the end of the design process. So to me it seems like the solution is selected, and the August 2 contract will allow Boeing to complete that phase before engineering is released for the final software fix.

Lookin forward to the result of the flight test.

bt

According to the AvWeek article, you are correct about the boom issue but the vision system issue is not yet at the same point.

AvWeek suggests there is contention between USAF and Boeing about how to resolve the vision system issues.

The only agreement it states with regard to the vision system is that Boeing will be the ones paying to resolve its issues.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1398
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:32 pm

Any further news about Cobham, it looks to be on the critical path.

KC-46 deliveries have been plagued by a number of issues, the most critical of which are problems with the remote vision system (RVS), which is used by the crew during the refueling process, and issues with maximum loads being placed on the refueling boom. This contract award addresses the issues with the boom.

The Air Force agreed to pay for the boom fixes, but Boeing is responsible for covering the cost of rectifying the RVS.

Another major hurtle concerns the refueling pods, being made by Cobham, which the Defense Contract Management Agency has said will not be ready until the third quarter of 2020. The delays stem from the process of certifying the pods with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), rather than any technical production problems.


https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/w ... c-46-boom/

I personally feel the Air Force would prefer the most deliveries to be the aircraft with these 3 big items fixed. One of the reasons the deliveries have been 1 or 2 per month, all made possible because Boeing cannot properly clean a plane.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17266
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:09 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
One of the reasons the deliveries have been 1 or 2 per month, all made possible because Boeing cannot properly clean a plane.


No it's all part of a special promotion - Buy a new tanker and get a free tool*.




*We don't know what tool, or where it is, but it's in there somewhere!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4239
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:37 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
Any further news about Cobham, it looks to be on the critical path.

KC-46 deliveries have been plagued by a number of issues, the most critical of which are problems with the remote vision system (RVS), which is used by the crew during the refueling process, and issues with maximum loads being placed on the refueling boom. This contract award addresses the issues with the boom.

The Air Force agreed to pay for the boom fixes, but Boeing is responsible for covering the cost of rectifying the RVS.

Another major hurtle concerns the refueling pods, being made by Cobham, which the Defense Contract Management Agency has said will not be ready until the third quarter of 2020. The delays stem from the process of certifying the pods with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), rather than any technical production problems.


https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/w ... c-46-boom/

I personally feel the Air Force would prefer the most deliveries to be the aircraft with these 3 big items fixed. One of the reasons the deliveries have been 1 or 2 per month, all made possible because Boeing cannot properly clean a plane.

“Another major hurtle”???? FFs someone got paid to write that crap? That kind of elementary school mistake makes me question the accuracy of anything in that piece.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8672
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread 2019

Fri Aug 09, 2019 3:06 am

Let's talk about the boom actuator fix, the Air Force by agreeing to pay for the fix are acknowledging that they have something to do with the botch design, considering how they have not been shy to demand that Boeing fix other deficiencies without pay thus boosting the cost overrun.
I would look carefully at the financing being done by Boeing on this fix, yes the Air Force is strapped for cash, and yes Boeing may want to fix the issue sooner rather than later as it will make their production process simpler, however, I would suggest we watch closely to see that the financing is for the 55.5 million and the repayment by the Air Force is for that amount with a reasonable amount of interest.
Just saying...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos