Is the KC-10 going to be cut?

[Clark Griswold]

What's the burn rate of the -46? I bet it's not as high as the -10 (which is double the -135).

Probably about 12k per hour when heavy... reference seems reasonable as the -46 is roughly equivalent to the 767-300ER in max takeoff weight but a bit smaller

Some more numbers from another forum, seems pretty close to the -135

[Nasty2004]

At $250 million per copy, they would need to be pure electric to save any money in the next 20 years. $250 million per jet would buy a lot of JP8.

[Warrior]

I can't help but figure the AF will still figure out a way to waste the cost savings that are made.

2.

I think nasty is assuming that the cost/hour reflects all of the logistics chain, FTU, etc. some accountants would argue that the cost/hr should include those but the .gov cooks the books however they see fit

[Majestik Møøse]

I can't help but figure the AF will still figure out a way to waste the cost savings that are made.

I think this is the biggest reason why many KC-10 guys are cynical. Cutting jets will just be a show; any leftover cash will eventually just flow to Boeing and Lockheed.

[Prosuper]

I think this is the biggest reason why many KC-10 guys are cynical. Cutting jets will just be a show; any leftover cash will eventually just flow to Boeing and Lockheed.

Probably why the 89th got a bunch of new C-32's. Boeing got the heavy mx contract for the 707's (C-137's) and when the first two go through they are found to have discrepancies beyond economical repair and are scrapped. What a coincidence. Boeing is known to go to customers flying older types they support and offer them a deal on newer airframes if they park their older frames. Kalitta has been asked a few times to park their 747's classics for newer -400's. Also it saves Boeing money by not keeping engineering and spares. If you look around the world at operators flying DC-10's and MD-11's the list is getting smaller everyday, FedEX , UPS, and World are the only U.S. operators that I know of still operating them in any numbers and they are buying new 777's, and 767's freighters. AAR Corp supplies parts for the KC-10's and the KDC-10 RNAF aircraft and the last time I got a part for the 2 CNS/ATM birds it wasn't cheap. On the flip side you have hundreds of parked C-135's at AMARC for parts so the USAF is better able to control costs. Plus it one huge pain in the ass to do any off station mx on that #2 tail engine.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Prosuper

[B.M.]

$250 million per jet would buy a lot of JP8.

Different pot of money?

I think this is the biggest reason why many KC-10 guys crewmembers of all MDSs are cynical. Cutting jets will just be a show; any leftover cash will eventually just flow to Boeing and Lockheed.

FIFY

[ThreeHoler]

https://www.dailyrepublic.com/opinion/ourview/time-to-shift-gears-in-kc-10-campaign/

[Lawman]

https://www.dailyrepublic.com/opinion/ourview/time-to-shift-gears-in-kc-10-campaign/

"We support our nations national interests in ...blah blah blah"

Translation

"Hey how the hell do you expect me to pay my mortgage if there aren't a half dozen Captains to rent my shitty properties too!"

[HU&W]

https://www.dailyrepublic.com/opinion/ourview/time-to-shift-gears-in-kc-10-campaign/

I want to hear about this "F-25 Lightning II" that's going to replace the hog.

Two U.S. senators have proposed changes to the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, which sets current-year policy goals and spending projections. The changes would prevent the Air Force from eliminating the A-10 – more commonly called the Warthog – until the service certifies that its replacement, the F-25 Lightning II, is cleared for combat operations.

[Blueman]

Is the airforce going to use this to cut personnel or to shift people into the -46?

[guineapigfury]

Is the airforce going to use this to cut personnel or to shift people into the -46 MQ-9?

FTFY.

[scudrunner12]

What advice would current KC-10 guys or others 'in the know' give to UPT studs about to drop? KC-10 are still dropping frequently unlike A-10s.

-------------------------------------

...don't RIF me, bra

[zmoney]

What advice would current KC-10 guys or others 'in the know' give to UPT studs about to drop? KC-10 are still dropping frequently unlike A-10s.

-------------------------------------

...don't RIF me, bra

It's still business as usual in the 10. Unit climate is similar to about two years ago. Folks are still upgrading at a normal rate. If you come to the -10, you'll have the same opportunities to succeed as other MAF pilots.

In other words, don't worry about it.

[ThreeHoler]

Jet still flies great. Some new cargo missions to interesting locations. Coronets and other stuff too.

Community is good. Sand vacations are somewhat fewer in number than last year.

Lots of talk about VSP...but that's probably just talk.

McGuire should get the two CNS/ATM jets from depot soon. Mod seems pretty nice, even if it has a few quirks. Hopefully it will get fully funded.

Rumormill: AMC has looked at the feasibility of ordering extra KC-46s to replace the KC-10s at Travis and McGuire.

Edited January 3, 2014 by ThreeHoler

[Clayton Bigsby]

So if the -10 gets nixed and the -46 replaces all the -135s, what are they going to do if there's another fleetwide grounding for something catastrophic? It happened with the C-141 back in the day, and that's one of the big reasons the C-5 is still around and the C-5M even got funded instead of relying solely on the C-17.

Look I know shit's expensive but the loss of redundancy or excess capacity is going to bite the US in the ass eventually

Edited January 4, 2014 by Clayton Bigsby

[Azimuth]

Jet still flies great. Some new cargo missions to interesting locations. Coronets and other stuff too.

Community is good. Sand vacations are somewhat fewer in number than last year.

Lots of talk about VSP...but that's probably just talk.

McGuire should get the two CNS/ATM jets from depot soon. Mod seems pretty nice, even if it has a few quirks. Hopefully it will get fully funded.

Rumormill: AMC has looked at the feasibility of ordering extra KC-46s to replace the KC-10s at Travis and McGuire.

I like that rumor, I'm a -135 guy going to SUU (non-flying) and would love to stay there as I get -46 class start date.

So if the -10 gets nixed and the -46 replaces all the -135s, what are they going to do if there's another fleetwide grounding for something catastrophic? It happened with the C-141 back in the day, and that's one of the big reasons the C-5 is still around and the C-5M even got funded instead of relying solely on the C-17.

Look I know shit's expensive but the loss of redundancy or excess capacity is going to bite the US in the ass eventually

I thought the C-5 was kept due to the capability to carry cargo that the C-17 can't? The C-17 was brought online faster that planned due to the wing box cracks.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Azimuth

[Karl Hungus]

So if the -10 gets nixed and the -46 replaces all the -135s, what are they going to do if there's another fleetwide grounding for something catastrophic? It happened with the C-141 back in the day, and that's one of the big reasons the C-5 is still around and the C-5M even got funded instead of relying solely on the C-17.

Look I know shit's expensive but the loss of redundancy or excess capacity is going to bite the US in the ass eventually

The -135 fleet wasn't grounded after the horrific Manas crash. If that didn't ground the fleet, what would?

Edit: this forum is still doing that stupid double-post thing.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Karl Hungus

[tunes]

I thought the C-5 was kept due to the capability to carry cargo that the C-17 can't? The C-17 was brought online faster that planned due to the wing box cracks.

This. Also the army/navy has designed a lot of things to specifically fit in a C5 and a C5 alone....

Edited January 4, 2014 by tunes

[ComingLeft]

1. We're the only tanker (existing or planned) that can support a real long-range fighter movement capability. Considering the future Pacific shift, this is vital. If we're ever going to try running an air war out of Guam (IAW the RAND analysis from a few years back) we'll need some pretty gigantic offloads to move a 2-4 ship of large air superiority fighters 3 hrs west and back. Boom sequencing won't be an issue. Ref 1986/2011 Libya ops.

If Guam is the only base, true. If the fighters are more than 3 hours away the KC-135 becomes a better option. The KC-135 has a longer flight endurance at MTOGW. There is a reason the KC-10 is kept closer to the air refueling tracks and has higher density of offloads.

[169FE]

Hi All,

New forum follower here. My name's Austin Van Duyne. I work as a Field Service Engineer for the OEM to the FR600 Centerline Hose Reel found on the Extender. If any Boomers, FE, Hydro guys, etc. who put their hands on the CLHRs would ever like to talk technical and share their experiences with the hose reel, I'd love to talk. I know that stateside the center line hose reel doesn't get used a lot unless it's partnering up with the Navy or foreign forces, but maybe you guys still use them time to time. I know they're obviously used over in the AOR overseas quite a bit.

Anyways, thanks a lot! Look forward to talking center line or even wingtip WARPs too. I don't work the WARPs but could always relay the information.

Cheers.

[WheelsOff]

Hi All,

New forum follower here. My name's Austin Van Duyne. I work as a Field Service Engineer for the OEM to the FR600 Centerline Hose Reel found on the Extender. If any Boomers, FE, Hydro guys, etc. who put their hands on the CLHRs would ever like to talk technical and share their experiences with the hose reel, I'd love to talk. I know that stateside the center line hose reel doesn't get used a lot unless it's partnering up with the Navy or foreign forces, but maybe you guys still use them time to time. I know they're obviously used over in the AOR overseas quite a bit.

Anyways, thanks a lot! Look forward to talking center line or even wingtip WARPs too. I don't work the WARPs but could always relay the information.

Cheers.

Dude, you sound like a Chinese spy or something

[169FE]

Dude, you sound like a Chinese spy or something

Point well taken, I can respect that! If anyone is interested let me know and we'll find a way to talk through official channels. If not, no problem. Of course, I don't support posting technical proprietary information on this forum; just thought I'd use this as a springboard to reach out to Travis, McGuire, and folks in the AOR! Tankers are important; got to have them!

If not, no worries! Have a good one everyone.

Edited January 27, 2014 by 169FE

[B.M.]

If any Boomers, FE... would ever like to talk technical... I'd love to talk... Look forward to talking center line or even wingtip WARPs too.

Dude, you sound like a Chinese spy or something

169FE,

I'm disgruntled because I can't wear a 'SUCK FACTOR' morale patch, and my finances suck D2 the pension COLA cut... I'll sell you the KC-10 eTOLD program for 5 bucks. If that isn't sweet enough I'll throw in the W&B program for some french fries.

I say sell the Chinese everything we have on the WARPs: that'll set them back at least 30 years.

Edited January 27, 2014 by B.M.

[Majestik Møøse]

If Guam is the only base, true. If the fighters are more than 3 hours away the KC-135 becomes a better option. The KC-135 has a longer flight endurance at MTOGW. There is a reason the KC-10 is kept closer to the air refueling tracks and has higher density of offloads.

Uhhh, no. Where did you hear that one? We only burn about 7K/hour more than you, on average, and we can carry 140K more. The advantage of the -135 is boom or drouge-cycle time; it's faster to refuel a 4-ship using 2x -135s vs 1x -10. Do you work at the CAOC, by any chance?

[169FE]

169FE,

I'm disgruntled because I can't wear a 'SUCK FACTOR' morale patch, and my finances suck D2 the pension COLA cut... I'll sell you the KC-10 eTOLD program for 5 bucks. If that isn't sweet enough I'll throw in the W&B program for some french fries.

I say sell the Chinese everything we have on the WARPs: that'll set them back at least 30 years.

I've heard this about the WARPs many times, trust me! I'm pretty sure the Navy and allied forces almost always ask for the center line; if not 100% of the time. Cobham is Cobham I realize (the manufacturer of both the WARPs and the center line), but the center line is the US manufactured equipment and the WARP is the UK manufactured stuff. Since I'm US-based, the only thing I deal with is the center line. Not to mention, I don't think the hose and drogue systems gets used a whole lot stateside as it is in general, so even the center line here is pretty low-key.

As far as the suck factor patch, maaaaaaan... I'm also in the Air Guard out of Illinois and we get to wear whatever the hell we want on our uniforms. Well, almost! Not really, but I wish. The pension and COLA freeze (or maybe they actually cut it?) is ridiculous, agreed.

eTold for $5.00, buy us a pack of Keystone with it, and split the fries and it's a deal.