Moderators: richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3016
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 8:54 am

L/N 1213, the last KC-46A of Lot #4 , seen ouside the FAL, the P&W engines appear to be installed outside.

See Matt Cawby' May 19th Paine Field blog : http://kpae.blogspot.com/2020/05/paine- ... ay-19.html
Detailed picture : http://www.paineairport.com/kpae18344n.htm

Aircraft data : L/N 1213 C/N xxxxx B767-2C 18-46058 USAF KC-46A (VH058) Lot 4, #18/18, tail 86058
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Ozair
Posts: 4965
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Sun May 24, 2020 1:21 am

Looks like the GAO will publish more frequent updates on the KC-46 as requested by three US senators, one of which is on the Senate Committee on Armed Services.

Lawmakers order an investigation of KC-46 technical flaws

A trio of senators are calling for an investigation into technical deficiencies that have delayed the operational employment of the KC-46 tanker made by Boeing.

New Hampshire Democrats Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen, as well as Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., directed the Government Accountability office on Friday to provide “periodic assessments” on the progress Boeing is making to fix problems impacting the KC-46’s boom and Remote Vision System.

The lawmakers — who represent Pease Air National Guard Base, N.H., and Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., where the KC-46 is based — wrote that they were concerned that Boeing is moving too slowly on correcting ongoing issues.

...

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/20 ... cal-flaws/

I'm not sure the additional scrutiny will do much other than generate some additional click bait articles as the USAF seems happy with the direction the RVS is now going.
 
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Sun May 24, 2020 2:15 pm

So for now, the USAF is stuck with 30 aircraft it cannot use.

“While the Air Force has already accepted over 30 aircraft, U.S. Transportation Command has decided not to use the aircraft in operations until the critical deficiencies are fixed, which is not expected to occur until 2023. Instead, it plans to use legacy KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft, some of which are over 60 years old,” they stated in a letter to Gene Dodaro, head of the GAO and comptroller general of the United States.


Perhaps they should pauze deliveries?
 
Ozair
Posts: 4965
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Sun May 24, 2020 9:16 pm

PepeTheFrog wrote:
So for now, the USAF is stuck with 30 aircraft it cannot use.

“While the Air Force has already accepted over 30 aircraft, U.S. Transportation Command has decided not to use the aircraft in operations until the critical deficiencies are fixed, which is not expected to occur until 2023. Instead, it plans to use legacy KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft, some of which are over 60 years old,” they stated in a letter to Gene Dodaro, head of the GAO and comptroller general of the United States.


Perhaps they should pauze deliveries?

The aircraft are being used, just not on operations so no overseas deployments, but the KC-46 is refuelling some types of aircraft over CONUS probably every day.
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 2:47 am

Ozair wrote:
The aircraft are being used, just not on operations so no overseas deployments, but the KC-46 is refuelling some types of aircraft over CONUS probably every day.


Bingo.

Cargo and medevac flights are open, just not coronets/dual roles. Basically, on flights where the KC-46 would require a legacy tanker to accompany it, they'll simplify the mission and just use the legacy tankers.

Sucks for those dudes.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 4:00 pm

Ozair wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:
So for now, the USAF is stuck with 30 aircraft it cannot use.

“While the Air Force has already accepted over 30 aircraft, U.S. Transportation Command has decided not to use the aircraft in operations until the critical deficiencies are fixed, which is not expected to occur until 2023. Instead, it plans to use legacy KC-10 and KC-135 aircraft, some of which are over 60 years old,” they stated in a letter to Gene Dodaro, head of the GAO and comptroller general of the United States.


Perhaps they should pauze deliveries?

The aircraft are being used, just not on operations so no overseas deployments, but the KC-46 is refuelling some types of aircraft over CONUS probably every day.


Just to understand, do you mean "not to use in operations" doesn't prohibit training over US soil ?
I know it was debatted months ago but now I can't find the discussion.

The pilot can stay current doing cargo missions but isn't it a bit pointless to train boom operators for missions they won't be able to perform during the next 3 years at least? On top with a system that may be quite different.
In order to be old and wise, one must first be young and dumb.
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 5:38 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
Just to understand, do you mean "not to use in operations" doesn't prohibit training over US soil ?
I know it was debatted months ago but now I can't find the discussion.

The pilot can stay current doing cargo missions but isn't it a bit pointless to train boom operators for missions they won't be able to perform during the next 3 years at least? On top with a system that may be quite different.


Page 3.

Without delving into the finer points of ADCON vs. TACON vs. OPCON, U.S. Transportation Command is essentially saying the aircraft won't be supporting their ongoing refueling requirements (projected deployments and most fighter drags).

No, it's not. Although RVS 2.0 will be a different visual and screen controls, the system interface (the UFCP) and boom system operations will be the same. Further, pilots have refueling currency requirements, too. Besides the obvious receiver AR events, there are also currencies for tanker refueling and autopilot-off tanker refueling and the only way to perform those is to be a tanker platform. Refueling another KC-46 knocks out two birds with one stone, especially when they do lead-swaps. Besides, if the flag goes up with a near-peer nation, the KC-46 will be used for refueling and the boom operators and pilots will need to perform their primary mission. You can't do that by flying around as glorified trash haulers for 3 years.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 6:31 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
Grizzly410 wrote:
Just to understand, do you mean "not to use in operations" doesn't prohibit training over US soil ?
I know it was debatted months ago but now I can't find the discussion.

The pilot can stay current doing cargo missions but isn't it a bit pointless to train boom operators for missions they won't be able to perform during the next 3 years at least? On top with a system that may be quite different.


Page 3.

Without delving into the finer points of ADCON vs. TACON vs. OPCON, U.S. Transportation Command is essentially saying the aircraft won't be supporting their ongoing refueling requirements (projected deployments and most fighter drags).

No, it's not. Although RVS 2.0 will be a different visual and screen controls, the system interface (the UFCP) and boom system operations will be the same. Further, pilots have refueling currency requirements, too. Besides the obvious receiver AR events, there are also currencies for tanker refueling and autopilot-off tanker refueling and the only way to perform those is to be a tanker platform. Refueling another KC-46 knocks out two birds with one stone, especially when they do lead-swaps. Besides, if the flag goes up with a near-peer nation, the KC-46 will be used for refueling and the boom operators and pilots will need to perform their primary mission. You can't do that by flying around as glorified trash haulers for 3 years.


Thanks LyleLanley ! :bigthumbsup:
In order to be old and wise, one must first be young and dumb.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2091
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 9:09 pm

I seem to recall there were a few days where the A-400 was flying but couldn't do refueling and many other of the roles it was to perform. Something like 6 years from entry into service to first refueling. Yes the A-400 has a lot of roles but it could only do a few of like 10 roles in the beginning.

The important thing is that RVS 2.0 works the way it really should, not just meet some paper accomplishments. It has to become the best tanker available or Boeing won't get to build more than the initial RFP quantities.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11172
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 11:22 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
Ozair wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:
So for now, the USAF is stuck with 30 aircraft it cannot use.

Just to understand, do you mean "not to use in operations" doesn't prohibit training over US soil ?
I know it was debatted months ago but now I can't find the discussion.

The pilot can stay current doing cargo missions but isn't it a bit pointless to train boom operators for missions they won't be able to perform during the next 3 years at least? On top with a system that may be quite different.


The USAF is not 'stuck' with aircraft it cannot use. As with the introduction of any new weapons system, there is a steep learning curve the USAF and ANG crews must learn. Fuel management, systems knowledge, little 'tricks of the trade', what the tanker can and cannot do, manage of defense systems, etc. are just a few things the crews and the airplane must learn. All of this info will be passed on to future crews.

The Boom Operators must stay current, too. They still do air refueling with the KC-46A and the Boom Operator is also the Loadmaster for cargo and med-evac missions.

Boom Operators must maintain currency in day contacts, night contacts, manual Boom operations (a degraded system) and emergency procedures.

Pilots must maintain currency in landings day, landings night, day and night take-offs, day and night air refueling (receiver), and emergency procedures.

Just because USTransCom doesn't want to use the KC-46 on its operational missions doesn't mean the USAF can't use it on operational missions.

I point out the A-400M and A-330-MRTT/KC-30 also had growing pains where it couldn't do some of those airplane's missions for years.

The RAAF KC-30A was what, 3 years late and another 2-3 years before it was fully operational? The first few years it could only do WARP drogue refueling (it couldn't do centerline drogue refueling or Boom refueling). For its first few years of RAAF operation it could not use its Boom at all, they kept falling off flight test tankers.

The A-400M was 5 years late in entering French AF service and had limited cargo capability for the next few years, other missions it was intended to do were 5-6 years late. At one point deliveries were so late Germany and Spain threatened to reduce the size of thier order, France threatened to buy some C-130Js and C-130-30Js.

Eventually both Airbus military airplane products got to where they needed to be.

The same will happen with the KC-46A.
Last edited by kc135topboom on Mon May 25, 2020 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 11:25 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
Thanks LyleLanley ! :bigthumbsup:


No worries!

I see your point with the A-400, but there are some important differences. Airbus didn't brag about their decades of tactical airlift experience. Nor did Airbus claim to be the 'low-risk' manufacturer with a proven airframe and decades of experience behind it. Airbus also never claimed their aircraft to be 'combat-ready' on day one of operations for their biggest customer like Boeing did. Last but not least, Europe's defense needs are distinctly different from the power projection needs of the USAF.

I hope the KC-46 blossoms, but it has big shoes to fill. It didn't help that its manufacturer boasted about its size 16's before it even left the delivery room.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11172
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Mon May 25, 2020 11:45 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
Grizzly410 wrote:
Thanks LyleLanley ! :bigthumbsup:


No worries!

I see your point with the A-400, but there are some important differences. Airbus didn't brag about their decades of tactical airlift experience. Nor did Airbus claim to be the 'low-risk' manufacturer with a proven airframe and decades of experience behind it. Airbus also never claimed their aircraft to be 'combat-ready' on day one of operations for their biggest customer like Boeing did. Last but not least, Europe's defense needs are distinctly different from the power projection needs of the USAF.

I hope the KC-46 blossoms, but it has big shoes to fill. It didn't help that its manufacturer boasted about its size 16's before it even left the delivery room.


Boeing should have boasted about its tanker experience with the KB-29, KB-50, KC-97, and KC-135. It should have boasted about its experience (through MD) with the KC-10. In fact, until the many times delayed A-330-MRTT came along, no body had any real experience with tankers, not even the Russians. Airbus had to study to death a French C-135FR to understand tankers, then they develop a test prototype based on the A-310-300, the KC-310-MRTT (not the Canadian or German A-310-MRTTs).

But the promises made by the Boeing salesmen for the KC-46 were writing checks that couldn't be cashed by the engineers.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26958
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Tue May 26, 2020 12:11 am

kc135topboom wrote:
But the promises made by the Boeing salesmen for the KC-46 were writing checks that couldn't be cashed by the engineers.


If Management had kept the Wichita engineers who had all that institutional tanker experience instead of letting them go and deciding to use Boeing Commercial Engineers and doing the work on the 767 FAL (which when it was reconfigured in 2010, was done so with the expectation that the 767-2C airframes would be sent to Wichita for outfitting into KC-46s), they might have been able to cover those checks.
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Tue May 26, 2020 2:36 am

kc135topboom wrote:
Boeing should have boasted about its tanker experience with the KB-29, KB-50, KC-97, and KC-135. It should have boasted about its experience (through MD) with the KC-10. In fact, until the many times delayed A-330-MRTT came along, no body had any real experience with tankers, not even the Russians. Airbus had to study to death a French C-135FR to understand tankers, then they develop a test prototype based on the A-310-300, the KC-310-MRTT (not the Canadian or German A-310-MRTTs).

But the promises made by the Boeing salesmen for the KC-46 were writing checks that couldn't be cashed by the engineers.


I'm sorry, TB, but I'm not really sure of the point you're making. Boeing has a ton of tanker history, which did very little good apart from PR. Airbus had very little tanker history, did a lot of homework, and has taken a few years to develop their next-generation tanker, but not less than Boeing. The Russians basically bolted on some buddy-refueling pods on their IL-76 to make a tanker, so why mention them?

Boeing entered the next-gen tanker fray ~ 2001 with the KC-767 tanker lease, lost the initial tanker RFP ~ 2009, then won the tanker rematch in 2011. 9 years later, 2020 is here and the KC-46 is years away from frontline service. The A330 was first ordered ~ 2005, entered service in 2011, and 3 years later flew its first combat sortie in 2014.

McD first flew its KC-10 ARB on a KC-135 in the late '70s to prove its concept. We all know how well that turned out, so what's the big deal about Airbus utilizing an A310 to develop its boom?
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3260
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Tue May 26, 2020 1:26 pm

If we are to talk about what if . . .

What if Boeing actually got that initial 200 tanker lease deal?

Then they may have been able to better retain that tanker experience and may not gotten into all these troubles with the KC-46, and the war fighters would have gotten the planes they needed without all the delay and drama.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26958
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Tue May 26, 2020 2:47 pm

It would have probably ended up a better financial deal for the USAF, which is ironic in that was the reason McCain was able to get it scuttled in the first place.
 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 1803
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Tue May 26, 2020 4:47 pm

Please keep this thread on topic which is KC-46 Production and Delivery, thanks.
 
User avatar
RobK
Posts: 3654
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:43 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:46 pm

747classic wrote:
L/N 1210, KC-46A at the Everett Modification Center (EMC), May 18th 2020, see :
See Matt Cawby's May 18th Paine Field blog : http://kpae.blogspot.com/2020/05/paine- ... ay-18.html
Detailed picture : http://www.paineairport.com/kpae18339d.htm

Aircraft data : L/N 1210 C/N xxxxx B767-2C 18-46057 USAF KC-46A (VH057) Lot 4, #17/18, tail 86057


?
I think you may have your wires crossed somewhere. Ln 1210 is 19-46057 msn 41879. Ln 1213 and 1216 are the next 2 with FedEx in between.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3016
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Wed Jun 03, 2020 6:03 am

RobK wrote:
747classic wrote:
L/N 1210, KC-46A at the Everett Modification Center (EMC), May 18th 2020, see :
See Matt Cawby's May 18th Paine Field blog : http://kpae.blogspot.com/2020/05/paine- ... ay-18.html
Detailed picture : http://www.paineairport.com/kpae18339d.htm

Aircraft data : L/N 1210 C/N xxxxx B767-2C 18-46057 USAF KC-46A (VH057) Lot 4, #17/18, tail 86057


?
I think you may have your wires crossed somewhere. Ln 1210 is 19-46057 msn 41879. Ln 1213 and 1216 are the next 2 with FedEx in between.


Aren't all Lot 4 aircraft ordered in fisical year 2018 and have the prefix 18 ?
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
RobK
Posts: 3654
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:43 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Wed Jun 03, 2020 8:20 am

I have no clue on the finer intracacies of the lot numbers. All I can tell you is that 46056 appears to be the final FY18 as ln 1210 onwards are all FY19 prefix on Boeing documentation. :goodvibes:
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3016
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Wed Jun 03, 2020 8:56 am

RobK wrote:
I have no clue on the finer intracacies of the lot numbers. All I can tell you is that 46056 appears to be the final FY18 as ln 1210 onwards are all FY19 prefix on Boeing documentation. :goodvibes:


You are fully correct, L/N 1210 is the first of Lot 5, ordered in FY 2019. I made a double count error in Lot 4. (too much paste and copy !)
L/N 1205 was the final KC-46A of Lot 4 (18 aircraft).

Only the serial numbers of L/N 1202 (86055), L/N 1205 (86056) and L/N 1207 (14-3611 JASDF) are not known yet in my 767 spreadsheet.
Any clues about these serial numbers and the variable (tabulation) number of L/N 1207 (Vxxxx ?)
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
RobK
Posts: 3654
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:43 pm

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:05 am

VH055 2C BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM 2C 1202 767 200 18-46055 41878
VH056 2C BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM 2C 1205 767 200 18-46056 41881
VH401 2C BDS JAPAN INTERNATIONAL TANKER PROGRAM BDS JAPAN INTERNATIONAL TANKER PROGRAM 2C 1207 767 200 14-3611 66585
:veryhappy:
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3016
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Boeing KC-46 Production and Delivery Thread - 2020

Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:19 am

RobK wrote:
VH055 2C BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM 2C 1202 767 200 18-46055 41878
VH056 2C BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM BDS USAF TANKER PROGRAM 2C 1205 767 200 18-46056 41881
VH401 2C BDS JAPAN INTERNATIONAL TANKER PROGRAM BDS JAPAN INTERNATIONAL TANKER PROGRAM 2C 1207 767 200 14-3611 66585
:veryhappy:


Thx, seen the allocation of VH401 for the first non USAF KC46A, it seems that Boeing has reserved a variable number block for a total of 400 USAF KC-46A's ! :D
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: fortytwoeyes and 31 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