KC46 winglets?

[12xu2a3x3]

52 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

That’s actually a paraphrase of real mx troubleshooting at Deid JSTARS sq, circa 2016. 

i heard a 13O say it

[Bob Uecker]

Each of the wing refueling pods weighs 1425lbs. I imagine whatever mods are in there to allow for it added weight.

https://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com/products_767_300er.php

Winglets as a set weigh 3300lbs. ~2000lbs is labeled as “wing modifications”
 

I imagine they went through some sort of cost analysis to figure out fuel burn from the weight from modifications to be able to support both the pods and the winglets. Maybe the acquisitions team and Boeing made some assumptions for the planes use that would make winglets not needed?  🤷🏼‍♂️

For some reason the KC46 has 19in longer wingspan, not sure why.

Edited January 15, 2020 by Bob Uecker

[StoleIt]

2 hours ago, Bob Uecker said:

For some reason the KC46 has 19in longer wingspan, not sure why.

Where you seeing that?

 

The -46 should have the same wing as a 767-200/300 at ~156 feet. The -400 has a bigger wing.

[Bob Uecker]

17 minutes ago, StoleIt said:

Where you seeing that?

 

The -46 should have the same wing as a 767-200/300 at ~156 feet. The -400 has a bigger wing.

... wikipedia

 

Checked Boeing’s website, it is the same wingspan. My mistake.

[Right Seat Driver]

On 1/5/2020 at 8:33 AM, Gazmo said:

Same reason the Air Force took the thrust reversers off of it. They basically don't learn from their mistakes from the KC-135R. They did a study on winglets for the KC-135 decades ago and although there were significant savings during cruise, the Air Force felt it wasn't worth the cost of upgrading 450+ aircraft. Hindsight is 20/20 though and I'd be willing to bet that it would have been very, very worth it at this point.

Shit, SAC had a hard enough time convincing the Air Force to put new motors on the KC-135. The first KC-135R model rolled out in 1982, about a year after NASA flew the KC-135A winglet tests. By that time the oldest jet was 26 years old.

I'll take the new motors over the winglets any day. Not to mention, the KC-135 never got a second ACM because it added too much weight and cut down on total offload capability.

[Breckey]

Shit, SAC had a hard enough time convincing the Air Force to put new motors on the KC-135. The first KC-135R model rolled out in 1982, about a year after NASA flew the KC-135A winglet tests. By that time the oldest jet was 26 years old.
I'll take the new motors over the winglets any day. Not to mention, the KC-135 never got a second ACM because it added too much weight and cut down on total offload capability.

How often are 135s offloading everything (or at least within a couple thousand pounds)?

[NKAWTG]

1 hour ago, Breckey said:

11 hours ago, Right Seat Driver said:

Shit, SAC had a hard enough time convincing the Air Force to put new motors on the KC-135. The first KC-135R model rolled out in 1982, about a year after NASA flew the KC-135A winglet tests. By that time the oldest jet was 26 years old.
I'll take the new motors over the winglets any day. Not to mention, the KC-135 never got a second ACM because it added too much weight and cut down on total offload capability.

How often are 135s offloading everything (or at least within a couple thousand pounds)?

Not today, but early 80s was a different story.  Any weight added decreased the amount of fuel to offload in the SAC mindset.  Ref the tanker TOAD, Dr Strangelove mission set. 

[Prozac]

8 hours ago, Breckey said:

18 hours ago, Right Seat Driver said:

Shit, SAC had a hard enough time convincing the Air Force to put new motors on the KC-135. The first KC-135R model rolled out in 1982, about a year after NASA flew the KC-135A winglet tests. By that time the oldest jet was 26 years old.
I'll take the new motors over the winglets any day. Not to mention, the KC-135 never got a second ACM because it added too much weight and cut down on total offload capability.

How often are 135s offloading everything (or at least within a couple thousand pounds)?

There still exists a mission that (in theory) requires offloading down to the standpipes. 

[Prosuper]

3 hours ago, Prozac said:

There still exists a mission that (in theory) requires offloading down to the standpipes. 

Peal off blow the escape spoiler , bail out, receiver goes north. It's a one way mission.

 

[Prozac]

12 minutes ago, Prosuper said:

Peal off blow the escape spoiler , bail out, receiver goes north. It's a one way mission.

 

And where the endearing term “Tanker T.O.A.D.” comes from.....Take Off And Die. 

[SurelySerious]

18 minutes ago, Prosuper said:

Peal off blow the escape spoiler , bail out, receiver goes north. It's a one way mission.

 

Did they remove the chutes a few years ago?

[Homestar]

50 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

Did they remove the chutes a few years ago?

Yes. Now you really die. 
 

I think taking those off was more a result of saving the effort of AFE. 

[Right Seat Driver]

1 minute ago, Homestar said:

Yes. Now you really die. 
 

I think taking those off was more a result of saving the effort of AFE. 

And fuel savings as well. Just like they took off the galleys, garbage cans, passenger EPOS and in some cases the troop seats. Only for AMC to release an update a year or so ago saying that taking 690 pounds off the jet did nothing to save fuel.

[Homestar]

1 minute ago, Right Seat Driver said:

And fuel savings as well. Just like they took off the galleys, garbage cans, passenger EPOS and in some cases the troop seats. Only for AMC to release an update a year or so ago saying that taking 690 pounds off the jet did nothing to save fuel.

Ah, the 2010s..... AMC fuel tracker days 😂

[Gazmo]

And fuel savings as well. Just like they took off the galleys, garbage cans, passenger EPOS and in some cases the troop seats. Only for AMC to release an update a year or so ago saying that taking 690 pounds off the jet did nothing to save fuel.

Yep. 700lbs doesn't do much in the way of drag on a swept back wing.

[Prosuper]

On 1/16/2020 at 6:30 PM, SurelySerious said:

Did they remove the chutes a few years ago?

We load them for OCF/FCF PDM Block 45 at Tinker still and service the escape spoiler bottle after we find and repair all the leaks. They only get filled every 5 years, Post FCF PDM ck. We recently were told to make sure to drain the bottle before the jet goes home, a young Airman who is not familiar with the system pulled down the chinning bar and knocked off the crew entry hatch and hurt a guy standing on the ground, only 2000 PSI.

 

[StoleIt]

On 1/16/2020 at 7:24 PM, Right Seat Driver said:

And fuel savings as well. Just like they took off the galleys, garbage cans, passenger EPOS and in some cases the troop seats. Only for AMC to release an update a year or so ago saying that taking 690 pounds off the jet did nothing to save fuel.

And I still had to lug around a 100lb bag of nearly-useless flip at the same time even though I had an iPad and some GO already took credit for saving the eleventy-billion dollars of fake money in fuel savings.