Boeing KC-46 Pegasus

[FighterJock]

just catching up to the tanker drama..
how different is the KC-46 from the KC-767 which was already being operated by Japan and Israel? I'm just trying to understand why there's so much trouble over this when its a pre-existing design.

From last year, the Category 1 deficiencies:

The tanker’s remote vision system or RVS — the camera system that allows KC-46 boom operators to steer the boom into a receiver aircraft without having to look out a window and use visual cues — provides imagery in certain lighting conditions that appears warped or misleading. Boeing has agreed to pay for potentially extensive hardware and software fixes, but the Air Force believes it will system won’t be fully functional until 2023-2024.

The Air Force has recorded instances of the boom scraping against the airframe of receiver aircraft. Boeing and the Air Force believe this problem is a symptom of the RVS’s acuity problems and will be eliminated once the camera system is fixed.

Boeing must redesign the boom to accommodate the A-10, which currently does not generate the thrust necessary to push into the boom for refueling. This problem is a requirements change by the Air Force, which approved Boeing’s design in 2016. Last year, Boeing received a $55.5 million contract to begin work on the new boom actuator

“The KC-46 fuel system is equipped with redundant protection for fuel containment. In some cases with this issue, aircraft maintenance crews are finding fuel between the primary and secondary fuel protection barriers within the system,” the company said in a statement.

There's also been work quality issues with the production line.

The export KC-767s don't have RVS and don't have to worry about refueling A-10s.

boo, if only the USAF was like the USN and went with the probe

Anyone got any ideas as to why the USAF went with the flying boom method of air to air refuelling instead of the more popular probe and drogue that the rest of the world uses?

 

[TomcatViP]

Fuel flow. Large aircraft need a massive quantity of fuel being transfered, a concern that nations without heavy Bombers don't share.
Boom is also more stable and less demanding on pilots, a bonus for fighters that can otherwise be unqualified, too tired or subjects to gust to the point of being unable to get fuel.
With a higher mass flow during each transfer, a group of aircraft can refuel in less time, expending less fuel in the process (and then having more mission range or loiter time).

 

[helmutkohl]

just catching up to the tanker drama..
how different is the KC-46 from the KC-767 which was already being operated by Japan and Israel? I'm just trying to understand why there's so much trouble over this when its a pre-existing design.

From last year, the Category 1 deficiencies:

The tanker’s remote vision system or RVS — the camera system that allows KC-46 boom operators to steer the boom into a receiver aircraft without having to look out a window and use visual cues — provides imagery in certain lighting conditions that appears warped or misleading. Boeing has agreed to pay for potentially extensive hardware and software fixes, but the Air Force believes it will system won’t be fully functional until 2023-2024.

The Air Force has recorded instances of the boom scraping against the airframe of receiver aircraft. Boeing and the Air Force believe this problem is a symptom of the RVS’s acuity problems and will be eliminated once the camera system is fixed.

Boeing must redesign the boom to accommodate the A-10, which currently does not generate the thrust necessary to push into the boom for refueling. This problem is a requirements change by the Air Force, which approved Boeing’s design in 2016. Last year, Boeing received a $55.5 million contract to begin work on the new boom actuator

“The KC-46 fuel system is equipped with redundant protection for fuel containment. In some cases with this issue, aircraft maintenance crews are finding fuel between the primary and secondary fuel protection barriers within the system,” the company said in a statement.

There's also been work quality issues with the production line.

The export KC-767s don't have RVS and don't have to worry about refueling A-10s.

boo, if only the USAF was like the USN and went with the probe

Anyone got any ideas as to why the USAF went with the flying boom method of air to air refuelling instead of the more popular probe and drogue that the rest of the world uses?

I've read something along the lines that it was intended for SAC and their bombers in the old days. tactical jet fighters in the USAF still used the drogue back in those days

 

[Moose]

Italians KC-767 have a probe and a RVS. They are even refuelling Italians F-35 without any known problems

Yep, completely forgot the Italians also use an RVS. However the control stations are dramatically different between the two, and it's also possible the Italians just avoid the sort of conditions which cause the KC-46's system to degrade.

 

[helmutkohl]

Italians KC-767 have a probe and a RVS. They are even refuelling Italians F-35 without any known problems

Yep, completely forgot the Italians also use an RVS. However the control stations are dramatically different between the two, and it's also possible the Italians just avoid the sort of conditions which cause the KC-46's system to degrade.

so if the older (and non controversial) KC-767 had an RVS and no problems, I wonder if the problem is specifically just due to refuelling the A-10 since its something only the US has

 

[TomcatViP]

The Italians KC-767 are fitted with a different RVS and a different boom with half the mass flow than seen in the KC-46.
The different design and software might explain why we are not aware of any serious problems with them refuelling their F-35.

KC-767 Aerial Refuelling Tanker / Transport Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The Boeing 767 tanker transport aircraft, designated KC-767 for the US Air Force, is a high-performance version of the Boeing…

www.airforce-technology.com

Boeing's KC-46A Pegasus Aerial Refuelling Aircraft

KC-46A Pegasus widebody, multirole aerial refuelling aircraft is being manufactured by Boeing under a contract with the US Air Force (USAF).

www.airforce-technology.com

 

[jsport]

ABMS, in New Phase, Prepares To Start Fielding | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force is ready to start buying some of the technology that will make up the Advanced Battle Management System.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[Grey Havoc]

DoD inspector general: Air Force mismanagement led to $100M KC-46 boom redesign

When problems with the KC-46 boom were originally found, the Air Force should have done more tests, the IG said.

www.defensenews.com

 

[FighterJock]

DoD inspector general: Air Force mismanagement led to $100M KC-46 boom redesign

When problems with the KC-46 boom were originally found, the Air Force should have done more tests, the IG said.

www.defensenews.com

Yet more bad news for the KC-46A Grey Havoc, now it is Air Force mismanagement regarding the redesign of the flying-boom. That is all the program needs right now.

 

[Archibald]

WTH is happening with that one, I have no idea, but it more and more looks like a flying "Littoral Combat Ship".

 

[PMN1]

WTH is happening with that one, I have no idea, but it more and more looks like a flying "Littoral Combat Ship".

Could soon be saying the same thing about the UK's Ajax armoured fighting vehicle.......

 

[Grey Havoc]

Air Force Asks to Cut 32 Tankers, Add More KC-46s | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force is again targeting old tankers for retirement, asking to cut 32 in 2022 so there is room for new KC-46s to come online.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[FighterJock]

Air Force Asks to Cut 32 Tankers, Add More KC-46s | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force is again targeting old tankers for retirement, asking to cut 32 in 2022 so there is room for new KC-46s to come online.

www.airforcemag.com

Why are the Air Force targeting the old KC-135 tankers and replacing them with the KC-46 when the new tanker still has various problems to solve?

 

[Archibald]

Because they are so old and maintenance intensive... I agree however it is a foolish move to replace them with flawed aircraft, even if brand new.

This mean that US tankers crews presently have the choice between

- flying KC-135s falling apart and risk dying

- flying KC-46s not falling apart but unable to refuel fighters without a risk of killing their pilots.

In both case, pilots and crews risk dying. That's a lose-lose situation...

 

[Moose]

The KC-46'S problems aren't nothing, but the aircraft are more capable than -135 even without everything having been fixed.

 

[Grey Havoc]

What’s a fair price for KC-46 spare parts? The Air Force isn’t sure

The soaring price of one spare part has led to new questions about an Air Force contract.

www.defensenews.com

 

[Archibald]

The Italians KC-767 are fitted with a different RVS and a different boom with half the mass flow than seen in the KC-46.
The different design and software might explain why we are not aware of any serious problems with them refuelling their F-35.

KC-767 Aerial Refuelling Tanker / Transport Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The Boeing 767 tanker transport aircraft, designated KC-767 for the US Air Force, is a high-performance version of the Boeing…

www.airforce-technology.com

Boeing's KC-46A Pegasus Aerial Refuelling Aircraft

KC-46A Pegasus widebody, multirole aerial refuelling aircraft is being manufactured by Boeing under a contract with the US Air Force (USAF).

www.airforce-technology.com

... and obviously the perfectly good italian system wasn't good enough for USAF and/or KC-46 (facepalm)

 

[aonestudio]

KC-46 Boom Operators Work Around Software Flaw | Air & Space Forces Magazine

A feature in the refueling system of the KC-46, designed to improve safety and ease the burden on boom operators, has been hampered by a software flaw.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[FighterJock]

KC-46 Boom Operators Work Around Software Flaw | Air & Space Forces Magazine

A feature in the refueling system of the KC-46, designed to improve safety and ease the burden on boom operators, has been hampered by a software flaw.

www.airforcemag.com

Yet another issue affecting the KC-46 tanker and this time it is a software flaw (Garbage in Garbage Out), let's hope that it can be fixed and that there are no more problems with the tanker.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Likely a forlorn hope though, unfortunately.

 

[aonestudio]

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

The new aircraft will bridge the gap to the next Advanced Air Refueling Tanker recapitalization phase, previously referred to as “KC-Z.” The existing KC-46A firm-fixed price contract is limited to 13 production lots, with the last planned procurement in 2027 and delivered in 2029.

As a commercial derivative aircraft, the Bridge Tanker will be based on existing and emerging technologies with a full and open acquisition competition. Neither developmental stealth nor unmanned capability is planned.

The requirements for Bridge Tanker are currently being defined and the necessary capabilities will be incorporated into the final Request for Proposal once it is validated through the Department of Defense’s joint staffing process. The Air Force plans to release the final RFP by the end of 2022.

Air Force releases Bridge Tanker Sources Sought Announcement

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

www.aflcmc.af.mil

Air Force Plans To Buy A New Tanker As Problems Persist With The One It's Already Buying

The Air Force wants additional tankers as a 'bridge' between the KC-46A and an advanced future design currently referred to as the KC-Z.

www.thedrive.com

 

[TomcatViP]

What about a KC-46 with a boom operator and KC-135 boom in the back?

 

[FighterJock]

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

The new aircraft will bridge the gap to the next Advanced Air Refueling Tanker recapitalization phase, previously referred to as “KC-Z.” The existing KC-46A firm-fixed price contract is limited to 13 production lots, with the last planned procurement in 2027 and delivered in 2029.

As a commercial derivative aircraft, the Bridge Tanker will be based on existing and emerging technologies with a full and open acquisition competition. Neither developmental stealth nor unmanned capability is planned.

The requirements for Bridge Tanker are currently being defined and the necessary capabilities will be incorporated into the final Request for Proposal once it is validated through the Department of Defense’s joint staffing process. The Air Force plans to release the final RFP by the end of 2022.

Air Force releases Bridge Tanker Sources Sought Announcement

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

www.aflcmc.af.mil

Air Force Plans To Buy A New Tanker As Problems Persist With The One It's Already Buying

The Air Force wants additional tankers as a 'bridge' between the KC-46A and an advanced future design currently referred to as the KC-Z.

www.thedrive.com

Why are the USAF planning on ordering another tanker (the KC-Z) so soon after the KC-46A? Unless the KC-46A has fallen out of favour with the Air Force top brass.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I doubt that faith in Boeing is gone but tbh, very badly shaken. https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-...-boeing-kc-46-and-expects-more/133156.article

Not sure how much longer poor standards will be allowed before the DoD takes major action.

 

[FighterJock]

I doubt that faith in Boeing is gone but tbh, very badly shaken. https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-...-boeing-kc-46-and-expects-more/133156.article

Not sure how much longer poor standards will be allowed before the DoD takes major action.

Wonder what action the US DoD will take over the KC-46 issues if they continue? Fines and or potentially reversing the number ordered?

 

[TomcatViP]

Given how Boeing had to redirect money on that program that would sound like an unfair decision.
Boeing had to lower their price given the competition was biaised by unrealistic pricing.

On the other hand, if some leasing have to be made in the future, here is probably one very good opportunity not to miss:

Lufthansa Puts 12 Airbus A340s Up For Sale

Lufthansa has officially put 12 of its Airbus A340-600s put for sale. The jets were sent for long-term…

simpleflying.com

 

[FighterJock]

Given how Boeing had to redirect money on that program that would sound like an unfair decision.
Boeing had to lower their price given the competition was biaised by unrealistic pricing.

On the other hand, if some leasing have to be made in the future, here is probably one very good opportunity not to miss:

Lufthansa Puts 12 Airbus A340s Up For Sale

Lufthansa has officially put 12 of its Airbus A340-600s put for sale. The jets were sent for long-term…

simpleflying.com

It all depends on how many flight hours the Lufthansa A-340s have remaining before the USAF buys them.

 

[aonestudio]

Boeing will have to pay to fix two new technical problems afflicting the KC-46 refueling tanker, which the U.S. Air Force has designated as “category 1” deficiencies that rank among the program’s most critical issues.

The Air Force has discovered that drain tubes in the KC-46′s air refueling receptacle — which are used to drain water out of the aircraft — can become cracked when the tanker operates in cold temperatures, the service stated in response to questions from Defense News. According to the service, this issue has occurred approximately three times, when water in the tubes froze and expanded, forming cracks.

The second problem involves a software bug in the KC-46′s Flight Management System, which has triggered “navigation anomalies,” according to Boeing.

The Air Force stated this issue has been limited to “isolated incidents,” most recently a March 3 flight over the Pacific Ocean. The crew “deferred to other navigation methods and did not declare an in-flight emergency; and the aircraft safely landed in Honolulu,” the service said.

More cost overruns are coming for Boeing as the KC-46 program logs another two technical deficiencies

The KC-46 now has six "category 1" deficiencies on the books.

www.defensenews.com

 

[Moose]

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

The new aircraft will bridge the gap to the next Advanced Air Refueling Tanker recapitalization phase, previously referred to as “KC-Z.” The existing KC-46A firm-fixed price contract is limited to 13 production lots, with the last planned procurement in 2027 and delivered in 2029.

As a commercial derivative aircraft, the Bridge Tanker will be based on existing and emerging technologies with a full and open acquisition competition. Neither developmental stealth nor unmanned capability is planned.

The requirements for Bridge Tanker are currently being defined and the necessary capabilities will be incorporated into the final Request for Proposal once it is validated through the Department of Defense’s joint staffing process. The Air Force plans to release the final RFP by the end of 2022.

Air Force releases Bridge Tanker Sources Sought Announcement

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

www.aflcmc.af.mil

Air Force Plans To Buy A New Tanker As Problems Persist With The One It's Already Buying

The Air Force wants additional tankers as a 'bridge' between the KC-46A and an advanced future design currently referred to as the KC-Z.

www.thedrive.com

Why are the USAF planning on ordering another tanker (the KC-Z) so soon after the KC-46A? Unless the KC-46A has fallen out of favour with the Air Force top brass.

KC-Z has, at times, been envisioned either as a re-compete of KC-Y or as a step-change in tanker survivability via an LO airframe. The former is as much as driving prices down as it is concern about KC-46, after all that aircraft would likely still play a role in a "normal" tanker competition. The latter is all about USAF/DOD concerns regarding sustaining tactical aircraft on station in the Pacific during a hot conflict with a near-peer adversary.

 

[Jason Dykstra (Wyvern)]

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

The new aircraft will bridge the gap to the next Advanced Air Refueling Tanker recapitalization phase, previously referred to as “KC-Z.” The existing KC-46A firm-fixed price contract is limited to 13 production lots, with the last planned procurement in 2027 and delivered in 2029.

As a commercial derivative aircraft, the Bridge Tanker will be based on existing and emerging technologies with a full and open acquisition competition. Neither developmental stealth nor unmanned capability is planned.

The requirements for Bridge Tanker are currently being defined and the necessary capabilities will be incorporated into the final Request for Proposal once it is validated through the Department of Defense’s joint staffing process. The Air Force plans to release the final RFP by the end of 2022.

Air Force releases Bridge Tanker Sources Sought Announcement

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production.

www.aflcmc.af.mil

Air Force Plans To Buy A New Tanker As Problems Persist With The One It's Already Buying

The Air Force wants additional tankers as a 'bridge' between the KC-46A and an advanced future design currently referred to as the KC-Z.

www.thedrive.com

Who can it be now?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SECVGN4Bsgg&ab_channel=MenAtWorkVEVO

 

[TomcatViP]

Don't forget that for now it can be another KC-46 if all troubles are fixed.

 

[Grey Havoc]

KC-Z has, at times, been envisioned either as a re-compete of KC-Y or as a step-change in tanker survivability via an LO airframe. The former is as much as driving prices down as it is concern about KC-46, after all that aircraft would likely still play a role in a "normal" tanker competition. The latter is all about USAF/DOD concerns regarding sustaining tactical aircraft on station in the Pacific during a hot conflict with a near-peer adversary.

I wonder if anyone at Lockheed Martin will dig this old project up:

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/lm-skunk-works-2002-force-employment-tanker-fet.3910/

 

[Jason Dykstra (Wyvern)]

Well, it would make a better option than those "stealth tankers". If the KC-46 was screwed up, something simple on paper, imagine what a massive screw up a stealth tanker would be. It would take half a century just to enter service!

 

[Grey Havoc]

Can't say that is not a possibility, given current circumstances.

 

[Archibald]

Well, it would make a better option than those "stealth tankers". If the KC-46 was screwed up, something simple on paper, imagine what a massive screw up a stealth tanker would be. It would take half a century just to enter service!

I second that opinion. Something is very, very wrong at Boeing: similar issues are plaguing CTS-100 crew capsule to the ISS (botched software trying to kill humans, just like the KC-46 vision system and boom).

They have lost touch on aerial tankers after dominating that market with aproximately 2000 aircraft since 1950 (800+ KC-97, 800+ KC-135, plus the innumerable 707s converted, followed by 767s)

If stealth is thrown into that mess, the end result maybe a F-35 / KC-46 mix of horrors.
Imagine: the worst of Lockheed in the early 2010's when F-35 hit rock bottom; piling up ont top of another KC-46 nightmare.

"The horror, the horror" (Apocalypse now)

 

[rooster]

I am bewildered by all these issues. Omg in automotive we plan for success and simulate all the time if we are using something new. Its as if Boeing planned to fail and frankly pisses me off as a citizen to see this what can only be incompetence. What's next, the flaps fall off? The toilette overflows?

Should have bought many more kc10 when we had the chance.

 

[aim9xray]

What's next, the flaps fall off? The toilette overflows?

Well, actually, yes. The pallet-mounted toilets overflow. (Discussed above).

 

[Archibald]

"be careful what you not wish for..."

 

[shin_getter]

Anyone got any ideas as to why the USAF went with the flying boom method of air to air refuelling instead of the more popular probe and drogue that the rest of the world uses?

I've read something along the lines that it was intended for SAC and their bombers in the old days. tactical jet fighters in the USAF still used the drogue back in those days

I believe standardizing tactical aircraft to flying boom was a mistake that is now coming home to roost. The inability for navy and air force to share refueling resources and the need to for specialized tanking assets make development difficult and a strategic problem as seen in this thread.

If USAF tactical aircraft uses probe and drogue, you can convert any random aircraft to tanking in basically no time. You'd have your stealth tanker by figuring out how to extend a hose out of a bomb-bay. There can be operational concepts like FARP C-130 (or V-22!) fuelers or "aircraft carrier-tanker" supported strike package. If one push the imaginative operational concepts a bit, there is seaplanes moving fuel from submarines into airplanes.

The USAF is just going to replay operation black buck after the forward airbases eat TBM spam. Its cute that tactical aircraft have short field operation capability, doesn't help much when the tankers all take huge runways and the tactical aircraft ranges are still insufficient.

I actually do wonder if converting aircraft back to probe and drogue is a good idea....

The Air Force is seeking companies that have the capability to deliver commercial derivative tanker aircraft to supplement the Air Force tanker aircraft fleet at the end of KC-46A production....

Why are the USAF planning on ordering another tanker (the KC-Z) so soon after the KC-46A? Unless the KC-46A has fallen out of favour with the Air Force top brass.

Can the solution get cheated three times?

 

[helmutkohl]

^good points
on a related note.. since we are all talking about UCAVs and their potential roles in refuelling and awacs..
theres been a few drone tankers being tested on... but they are all drogue systems.
how large a drone needs to be to fit a large boom system