I think that they may want them sooner rather than later, so a 20 year development program may not be the answer in the short term.
USAF News and Discussion
- Thread starter RobWilliams
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I wonder where the USAF deep thinkers were in 2015 when Boeing closed the Long Beach plant? Then there were the 10 whitetails that were ignored. What do they know now that wasn't apparent a mere three years ago? The possibility of confronting a first tier opponent has no doubt heightened the concerns for increased airlift but this isn't new. Perhaps the feeling now is it's more probable.
the concerned
Active Member
If it was possible to restart production would you build the same or look to build a improved version. If so what could you do to improve it
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
This link suggests some ideas that were suggested for the C-17. IMO, only the C-17B variant makes any sense but even its improvements probably couldn't justify the costs. A KC-17 was also considered but the C-17's operating costs are too high for this role compared to converted airliners. If production were to be restarted, the best improvement would be more economical engines to reduce operating costs.
Three types of C-17s That Never Took Off
Three types of C-17s That Never Took Off
The “deep thinkers” were in congress under the Obama administration where “sequestration” was the order of the day.
Reminding F22s to fly out of Tyndall AFB by the weekend.
All Of Tyndall's F-22 Raptors Survived Hurricane Michael, DoD Says
All Of Tyndall's F-22 Raptors Survived Hurricane Michael, DoD Says
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
That's great news for the USAF. Hopefully this near miss will result in very carefully planning as to where these jets should be positioned in the future. Even if Tyndall is rebuilt, there is no need to base F-22s there during hurricane season, a fleet of 4th Gen and some F-35s during those months will do the job.
Unfortunately you can’t move assets around like that.
For example because that’s where the raptors are home based it’s where the drivers and maintainers live, their partners and families live, work and go to school, where the contractors and support assets are setup to look after them. It’s also likely the airspace is suitable for F-22 where other areas may not be.
Same for the 4th gen and F-35’s. They won’t want to move out of their home base for long stretches.
The USAF fighter fleets are already struggling enough with retention that moving people around, TDY, for 6 months at a time for non-operational weather reasons is unlikely as it will only agitate and frustrate more people who are already voting with their feet. .
That storm was a fluke in so many ways. It went from tropical storm to damned near a Cat 5 in a very short amount of time and it is the strongest storm to hit that area in recorded history, and it is a part of Florida that does not get many storms.
The USAF did a fantastic job getting what they could out on very short notice while also getting them and their families out as well.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Move them to other F-22 bases and restrict there use until the worst part of hurricane season is over. A little over 180 jets that need to last at least another 25 years makes them too valuable to risk losing to something that is preventable.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Looks like Raptors will never return to Tyndall AFB. This is a great move that will lessen loss due to climatic events in the future. Raptors are just too important.
Air Force wants to house three F-35 squadrons at rebuilt Tyndall, move Raptors permanently
Air Force wants to house three F-35 squadrons at rebuilt Tyndall, move Raptors permanently
Millennium7
Member
Speaking of the F-22, some interesting footage here of stuff that, likely, won't be done at Tyndall anymore.
Mod Edit: Embedded link promoting a YouTube channel deleted.
-Preceptor
Mod Edit: Embedded link promoting a YouTube channel deleted.
-Preceptor
Last edited by a moderator:
the concerned
Active Member
I have been reading up on the new supersonic airliner called overture. I was wondering if they could adapt this aircraft for military use. Maybe a long overdue replacement for the Raven.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The first KC-46 tankers are to arrive shortly, flaws still included apparently. Time for the Alabama Congrssion team to start hyping the viable alternative.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Do you have a link to material on this new SST? Would not the Growler be the Raven replacement?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Here’s a more positive article on the KC-46. I am still skeptic however but I guess having 8 jets out in the real world will reveal if the two mentioned problems are minimal. Two interesting comments, 179 jets ordered but 400 eventually hoped for, and there is no plan B. I call BS on the latter point. The Airbus alternative is viable and might be better for the Pacific theatre. Hell, if 400 aircraft are required then a split buy for the first 200 would have made sense IMO and let the best performer get the 200 additional follow on order.
Five Reasons The Air Force Has Begun Taking Delivery Of Boeing's KC-46A Pegasus Tanker
Five Reasons The Air Force Has Begun Taking Delivery Of Boeing's KC-46A Pegasus Tanker
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Agree, the Growler/SH was the Raven replacement. As for the SST Overture, here’s a link but as for military conversion, why? The B-21 would certainly be better and maybe even cheaper.
Boom - Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
Thanks, even a B-1B conversion would be cheaper.
It's unlikely IMO that if ever additional tankers are to be ordered the AF will solicit bids for 200 a/c. More likely they buy smaller numbers yearly spread out over a decade or more. KC-46 will enjoy the advantages accruing to being the incumbent.
the concerned
Active Member
I always hoped originally they would have gone for a split buy. Say 120 kc-46's and 59 kc-45's. Even done the second batch the same . Surely they would have got a better fleet.