Air Refueling

[Guest]

Annex A. My pal did have a missile cook off thru the the formation at Red Flag

What? When was that? I suppose it hit the Caliente Hospital, too. New Thunderdome restriction SFC-UNL 200nm radius?

[Gas Man]

In combat? Bullshit.

Godfather,

There are quite a few things in combat I have let slide. I have stuck around below bingo to give guys gas that were supporting TICs. At a Flag? In training? No.

Funny how important little bullshit things are to the fighter community. When I was a crew chief we had guys that would shut their canopy's in unison then crank engines at the exact same time. During debrief 3 will get bitched out because he was slow on the radio all day during check in. You debrief the shit out of EVERYTHING. This whole thread spiraled out of control because guys flat stated they were blowing off a prescribed Air Refueling procedure. Who cares, right? Not like any airplanes have ever crashed during AR because they didn't follow proper procedures and did what they wanted to do or anything like that.

If you follow the rules, the tanker won't have to say shit. You may think you are running the show, but in reality my boom is telling me over the interplane exactly what each of you are doing and I am allowing you to do it. So go ahead and keep telling yourself that you are in charge. Fact is, if something goes wrong, I am to blame for allowing it to happen. I am the one that is getting called on the carpet. I am the one that has to live with the consequences if some guy doesn't do what he is supposed to and I don't speak up and something happens. A few years ago one of our guys allowed the fighters on his wing to clip the eastern edge of the MOA at Nellis. The tanker stayed in but the fighters on his wing spilled out. They all got a talking to. The AC of the tanker was grounded. Why do you think that is? Maybe because he screwed up and led HIS flight out of the area.

This whole thread is bullshit. Read the Regs. If you don't do what is says, you are wrong. Don't like that, change the regs. Until then, do what you're told.

Venture about 100nm west and you'll see what you consider a "near mid air" doesn't even qualify for a TR stop.

Now you're talking out your ass.

So if you are not visual during an engagement you are cleared to continue the fight? I have been to a lot of briefs and I don't remember hearing that.

[Guest whatever]

Godfather,

There are quite a few things in combat I have let slide. I have stuck around below bingo to give guys gas that were supporting TICs. At a Flag? In training? No.

Funny how important little bullshit things are to the fighter community. When I was a crew chief we had guys that would shut their canopy's in unison then crank engines at the exact same time. During debrief 3 will get bitched out because he was slow on the radio all day during check in. You debrief the shit out of EVERYTHING. This whole thread spiraled out of control because guys flat stated they were blowing off a prescribed Air Refueling procedure. Who cares, right? Not like any airplanes have ever crashed during AR because they didn't follow proper procedures and did what they wanted to do or anything like that.

If you follow the rules, the tanker won't have to say shit. You may think you are running the show, but in reality my boom is telling me over the interplane exactly what each of you are doing and I am allowing you to do it. So go ahead and keep telling yourself that you are in charge. Fact is, if something goes wrong, I am to blame for allowing it to happen. I am the one that is getting called on the carpet. I am the one that has to live with the consequences if some guy doesn't do what he is supposed to and I don't speak up and something happens. A few years ago one of our guys allowed the fighters on his wing to clip the eastern edge of the MOA at Nellis. The tanker stayed in but the fighters on his wing spilled out. They all got a talking to. The AC of the tanker was grounded. Why do you think that is? Maybe because he screwed up and led HIS flight out of the area.

This whole thread is bullshit. Read the Regs. If you don't do what is says, you are wrong. Don't like that, change the regs. Until then, do what you're told.

Now you're talking out your ass.

So if you are not visual during an engagement you are cleared to continue the fight? I have been to a lot of briefs and I don't remember hearing that.

82% of the time, the tanker is a clown show. Remember me?? I still want to rejoin on the left and flow my formation to the right (I think per the reg that Gas man wrote, because he is one of the few tanker guys who reads them). This is the airspeed/altitude I prefer. Today, I still don't prefer to refuel in the clouds right ther...shit, we're in the clouds. If you look out your left window, its clear, but whatever. I know you can't fly towards me because Pakistan is 40 miles off your nose. I also like how the guy in back that you rely on so much seems like he just got out of boom school EVERY TIME and is afraid to put the thing in the thing. But I'm sure he's critiquing the hell out of me for not being 100% stable. Easy to say while lying down/sitting there with your box lunch all over your flight suit. I digress, the same guy may someday talk me down if I am NORDO.

-Hope this post helps :)

(ps, this thread is awesome!)

Edited March 11, 2010 by whatever

[Guest midtown]

Longtime reader, first time poster… Just reading through all this, I can’t help but kind of feel sorry for the fighter guys. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the fighter community or their pilots - I still have tremendous respect for what they do, how they accomplish it, and their level of detail on so many things.

It seems like the community as a whole is "losing its identity", and isolating themselves more and more from the rest of the Air Force. It used to be the fighter guys were the best-of the best, the elite and the guys that ran and controlled the Air Force. Times have, and still continue to change. Our CoS is a "heavy" guy. Gone are the days where the top Air Force leaders all hail from the fighter community. Gone are the days where developing fighter and those type of attack assets is our primary focus; now Congress is trying to cut them and buy more mobility, unmanned and light strategic attack aircraft. (whether this is a good decision or not is for another topic). Gone are the “Top Gun” days. And unfortunately, gone are the days that being a pilot (regardless of MWS) is viewed as the elite profession in the Air Force (it’s sad)…

A lot of the top guys and girls in pilot training are no longer geared towards the "fighter mentality" and are putting T-1 or T-44s first - whether it's because they want to travel and see the world, work with a crew, or are just turned off by the recent drops, and the likelyhood of not getting a fighter if they track T-38s. Combine that with the recent announcement of the last manned fighter and a decreased in demand and need for strategic air attack aircraft and you can't really blame them.

I think this has caused a tremendous attitude and mentality shift among the rest of the Air Force, and the rest of the pilots, especially in the recent years. The fighter guys are extremely well at getting tasked with a mission, and focusing solely on it and executing it to the T in a very controlled environment. They have to be – dropping a bomb on a target 5 seconds late, or 30 feet to the right could have disastrous consequences. That’s why they seem to be very tough on each other and have debriefs that last longer than their flights, and maybe why certain regulations aren’t as important to them as some are to the AMC guys. At the same time, the Air Mobility (tanker and mobility) assets are usually pretty good at getting a mission, extensively planning it but also seeing the big picture – which they have to be, especially when they are flying around the world conducted multiple refuelings, airdrops, cargo hauls over the period of sometimes 24 hours in many times a very uncontrolled environment.

How this all relates to this thread, by reading it, it’s pretty obvious there’s a regulation in place (the ATP-56B) that doesn’t just govern how we conduct refueling operations within our own service, but with other allied nations. It clearly states that the tanker runs the AR. It’s the tanker’s ass on the line if the refueling goes wrong. As has been stated before, the tanker may be managing several refueling activities at the same time. So what’s with all the fighter guys giving the tanker guys such a tough time? Is it because they feel superior to a tanker guy? Is it because it’s tough to have an enlisted crew-member telling them what they will or won’t do? Or is it because this is just another instance of the fighter community losing what it perceives as “control” of situations? I don’t know, I’m just hypothesizing, but I think I have some valid points or at least points of topics…

Anyway, enough of what seems to have turned into a thesis statement, especially on a board like Baseops… haha, flame away!

[rcwelch]

Could someone please pass the popcorn....

[Guest whatever]

How this all relates to this thread, by reading it, it’s pretty obvious there’s a regulation in place (the ATP-56B) that doesn’t just govern how we conduct refueling operations within our own service, but with other allied nations. It clearly states that the tanker runs the AR. It’s the tanker’s ass on the line if the refueling goes wrong. As has been stated before, the tanker may be managing several refueling activities at the same time. So what’s with all the fighter guys giving the tanker guys such a tough time? Is it because they feel superior to a tanker guy? Is it because it’s tough to have an enlisted crew-member telling them what they will or won’t do? Or is it because this is just another instance of the fighter community losing what it perceives as “control” of situations? I don’t know, I’m just hypothesizing, but I think I have some valid points or at least points of topics…

Anyway, enough of what seems to have turned into a thesis statement, especially on a board like Baseops… haha, flame away!

You say the tanker runs the AR. I certainly understand your point there. The problem is that most tankers DON'T do this. They don't know what kill box they're in, they don't do anything to expedite the rejoin (like using their TCAS SA, or even a bearing/distance from a common point...say an ARIP). If you run the AR, don't run me into the f'ing clouds when you don't have to. Why is this so difficult? Call up the controllers and tell them what you're going to do. Be in charge!! When I am on my 3rd AR of the day, yo-yo'ing with 2 at a TIC, and I have to wait for the tanker to slow and descend and run pre-ar checks I get annoyed...On top of that, the boom will probably be extra sensitive and it'll take way longer than necessary. I will also have to tell the tanker crew to turn towards the TIC, despite the fact that we are both talking to Wizard (or whoever) on the same freq and he knows what I'm doing. So, excuse me if my confidence is low. So, I'm going to continue to tell you what I need because that's what will get me back to the fight fastest...you can be in charge, though. And by the way, since I'm on the same freq as you, I know you have to go refuel that F-15E that just took off from Bagram enroute to his XCAS. As for the rest of your post, please don't feel sorry for me, I enjoy what I do, and I won't feel sorry for you because I am certain you enjoy your job as well.

[Guest midtown]

You say the tanker runs the AR. I certainly understand your point there. The problem is that most tankers DON'T do this. They don't know what kill box they're in, they don't do anything to expedite the rejoin (like using their TCAS SA, or even a bearing/distance from a common point...say an ARIP). If you run the AR, don't run me into the f'ing clouds when you don't have to. Why is this so difficult? Call up the controllers and tell them what you're going to do. Be in charge!! When I am on my 3rd AR of the day, yo-yo'ing with 2 at a TIC, and I have to wait for the tanker to slow and descend and run pre-ar checks I get annoyed...On top of that, the boom will probably be extra sensitive and it'll take way longer than necessary. I will also have to tell the tanker crew to turn towards the TIC, despite the fact that we are both talking to Wizard (or whoever) on the same freq and he knows what I'm doing. So, excuse me if my confidence is low. So, I'm going to continue to tell you what I need because that's what will get me back to the fight fastest...you can be in charge, though. And by the way, since I'm on the same freq as you, I know you have to go refuel that F-15E that just took off from Bagram enroute to his XCAS. As for the rest of your post, please don't feel sorry for me, I enjoy what I do, and I won't feel sorry for you because I am certain you enjoy your job as well.

I don't feel "sorry" for you guys - the wording was poor. We're pilots; we all think the MWS we fly is the greatest, that we are way sweeter than everyone and that we don't screw up... It's in our nature and what makes us good...

I agree with a lot of the points in your post; the tanker should be directive and in charge. And I know personally, we try to be. But from some of the posts and experiences on here, it looks like when a lot of them try they are met with resistance from the fighter guys who think they know better (and to their credit maybe a lot of times they do).

Experiencing both ends of the spectrum quite often (as a tanker and as a receiver) we always try to keep our customer in mind when doing AR as tanker, whether it be out of the sun or around clouds or giving them the lighting they want to make it easier. I think it can be tough for a tanker and crew, who hasn't been on the receiving side of AR, to understand some of the stuff the receiver has to deal with. At the same time, we have multiple radio frequencies, and a lot of the time, while we're giving you gas, we're talking to another flight on a different frequency or we are planning ahead for our next RV trying to make the timing work. At the end of the day we all are on the same team and it really shouldn't come down to a d**k measuring contest between the tanker and receiver.

Edited March 12, 2010 by midtown

[Wolf424]

Our CoS is a "heavy" guy.

Herks Baby!

A lot of the top guys and girls in pilot training are no longer geared towards the "fighter mentality" and are putting T-1 or T-44s first - whether it's because they want to travel and see the world, work with a crew, or are just turned off by the recent drops, and the likelyhood of not getting a fighter if they track T-38s.

Shack. All of the above. Times have changed. Back in the Cold War, there was another major superpower with a large and comparable Air Force for fighter guys to fight. Not there isn't. It's all CAS and Airlift and that's where the action is at. Even if you do go fighters, you are looking at 1 year before you start UPT, 1 year in UPT, 1 1/2 years waiting for and completing IFF, then you go to your schoolhouse for awhile...etc. Plus, back in the day, half of a drop would be fighters. There just aren't as many anymore.

The fighter guys are extremely well at getting tasked with a mission, and focusing solely on it and executing it to the T in a very controlled environment. They have to be – dropping a bomb on a target 5 seconds late, or 30 feet to the right could have disastrous consequences. That’s why they seem to be very tough on each other and have debriefs that last longer than their flights, and maybe why certain regulations aren’t as important to them as some are to the AMC guys.

You can say that about many airframes. If the tanker doesn't plan fuel correctly, then someone could not get their gas. If the airlift guys drop their CDS 50 yards too far right, the ground pounders might not get their bullets and beans. If you get even 50 feet low or are 5 knots too fast, you could throw paratroopers completely off the DZ. I know comparing that to dropping bombs is a stretch, but my point is that (at least in airlift) we spend A LOT of time going over mission prep, going over CARPs, winds, run-ins, charts, etc. Every airframe has something that requires a very slim margin of error. If it's not executed correctly, people can be hurt.

But anyway, I'll fade back and continue to watch this dick measuring contest between the clowns and jocks.

[Guest whatever]

The fighter guys are extremely well at getting tasked with a mission, and focusing solely on it and executing it to the T in a very controlled environment.

I'm not sure what you mean by controlled environment. Ever listen to a real TIC? Not a standard, emminent threat TIC, but a real shooting TIC? It's not controlled. If we do our job, it will become controlled, but it certainly doesn't start that way. Lots of stuff to sort through. Same for an AI mission with pop-up threats and Red air. Or a CSAR. Or an 8 v 8 with strikers.

[Guest Crew Report]

You say the tanker runs the AR. I certainly understand your point there. The problem is that most tankers DON'T do this. They don't know what kill box they're in, they don't do anything to expedite the rejoin (like using their TCAS SA, or even a bearing/distance from a common point...say an ARIP). If you run the AR, don't run me into the f'ing clouds when you don't have to. Why is this so difficult? Call up the controllers and tell them what you're going to do. Be in charge!! When I am on my 3rd AR of the day, yo-yo'ing with 2 at a TIC, and I have to wait for the tanker to slow and descend and run pre-ar checks I get annoyed...On top of that, the boom will probably be extra sensitive and it'll take way longer than necessary. I will also have to tell the tanker crew to turn towards the TIC, despite the fact that we are both talking to Wizard (or whoever) on the same freq and he knows what I'm doing. So, excuse me if my confidence is low. So, I'm going to continue to tell you what I need because that's what will get me back to the fight fastest...you can be in charge, though. And by the way, since I'm on the same freq as you, I know you have to go refuel that F-15E that just took off from Bagram enroute to his XCAS. As for the rest of your post, please don't feel sorry for me, I enjoy what I do, and I won't feel sorry for you because I am certain you enjoy your job as well.

Most tankers do know what killbox we're in, we use the same ATO/ACO you get daily. In fact most crews I've been part of will ask the GCI for clearance into a keypad/kill box out of the AR track so they can drop their fighters off closer to the TIC, etc. Sounds like you've just had bad luck. Using TCAS SA is good until you have the Strike Eagle guy who kills their squawk and lose them on TCAS. We don't try to run you into the clouds, however fighter guys are under some assumption that tankers can just do random AR anywhere, wherever they want.

...One of my biggest pet peeves.

Really? Really boom? You want to know what my tail number is? ...FAIL.

Not all fighters have the tail # written in three places on the nose, but for fvck's sake, how hard is your job? Don't you guys have a book for this shit?

"Hawg 01, copy you're switches safe....confirm nose cold?" "...Yup, been cold for 32 years now."

"Hawg 01, is FL260 gonna work for you guys today?" "...Uhh, No, the A-10 isn't capable of AR that high...let's try 18 or 19."

"Ohh, really? ...Uhh...standby, we need to coordinate with center for the airspace."

Because all Hawgs have the paint scheme, right? And I'm never refueling trying not to look through de-ice/anti-ice fluid streaks either.

"Tanker 25, hey can you guys start a left turn?"...sure, we'll stay in the orbit we've been in for the past 15 minutes.

"Tanker 25, can you give me a BRA?"...It's the same BRA Miser/Wizard gave you two minutes ago.

"We might need to toboggan."...yeah, notice our flaps are extended?

[Right Seat Driver]

Here's the thing, I will do everything I can to make sure my receivers get their gas. A lot of times in the AOR the controllers won't clear us out of the airspace to grab the receivers, now with that being said I try to find out what killbox they are working and stay as close as I can to that killbox without running into other adjacent tracks or the air routes running along the tracks. However, I do agree that tanker crews need to get more directive with the controllers. For example one night we were giving a shit ton of gas to a Bone and he could only take one A/R pump without spraying gas all over the place and any turn would make it worse. We just got on the radio and said we need to track current heading for receiver consideration. They were cool with it after a bit of explaining.

[WABoom]

I guess i'll chime in my 2 cents. I haven't posted much but i'm an avid reader and I enjoy all the discussions. Frankly, some of the responses to peoples posts have kept me from writing. Now that I have taken my Testemax

I feel the need to share a liitle perspective from the Booms side. Regs are Regs, but I also understand in some situations you just have to do what needs to be done to get the receiver gas. I had an A-10 over the Stan that kept falling off the boom because he was heavy. The guidelines for me to make a contact is to wait for the receiver to stabilize 2-3 feet from the boom and then extend to make the contact. So to get this guy his gas and get back into the fight, I kept the boom extended at 10 feet, like normal, and I basically let him make the contact. Doing so gave him a little more time on the boom before he broke the aft limit, thus getting the gas sooner and saving the Joes on the ground during a firefight. I could give dozens of scenarios like that. I have been fortunate to fly with some really great pilots who do everything they can to help out the receivers, sometimes we can't always make it happen but we do try. I think if the 2 communities talked a little more, we could have a better understanding of each others mindset and reasoning for different aspects of AR. On another note, I haven't and have never been on a crew that denied gas. I haven't even heard of that happening very many times. We have a lot of young booms, straight out of high school, 8 flights and a check out of Altus, and off to their bases, so don't be so hard on a guy asking for the tail number, that might be his 20th flight(total) which means he is alone without an IB for the first time ever. Sorry to ramble but it's after midnight and I'm on a roll. I would love to write more but I do not want to subject whoever reads this to more of my poor sentence structure, grammar, spelling, or whatever. See you guys in the air! Edited March 12, 2010 by WABoom

[skinny]

When I asked if you had a book for this shit, I wasn't talking about a log or record of tail numbers. I was talking about a pub or even simple gouge about your reciever. It's like you guys have never talked to each other before.

Like I said, most units do have a book listing the entire AF inventory, but as jets move around, it becomes a living document that doesn't get updated as often as it should.

Again, don't you have a book for this shit? It's on the nose, granted, in slightly cryptic form. But it's not rocket science: "10978" = 81-978, "90251" = 79-251. If the boom blocks it, look before or after contact.

Not everyone flies a Hog. Therefore not all jets were built in the same years as the hog. Just because your tail number is 10978, that '1' could mean 61, 71, 81, 91, 01, etc. It's even more fun with the USN when they try to give us their side number, you know the three digit one on their nose? There are probably 10 aircraft in the USN that have that same side number. What we need from them, their Bureau Number(BUNO), is a six digit number and the only place you can find it is just below their horizontal stab. Now how the hell am I supposed to see that, even if he is on the wing!?

...thanks dude, ....never thought of that.

No problem dude! Glad I could help!

[Guest Okawner]

I'm not asking to be dickish, so don't take it that way. In my job we also support customers and although standardized procedures exist, different users have different preferences. I always flex to the user regardless of what the reg says; in fact our "flex to your demands" approach has made us very popular and useful. So with my experience, I'm curious why you'd tell the customers how it's going to be instead of the other way around? I know there are times when you have to tell the user "no" for whatever good reason, but if they want something and your only reason not to acquiesce is because you are using a standard flow and you don't want to modify.... bro, that seems like exerting aurthority solely to exert authority and not helpful to the dudes in the fight.

Dude, you are spot on. I am so effing tired of the entire AF thinking that everyone else exists to support them. Talk about the tail wagging the dog. Unless you are dropping bombs on someone, YOU are the support. YOU are customer service. That includes other airframes as well. I understand the importance and safety value inherent in standardized procedures. But do you (Crew Report, Gas Man) honestly think a 4 ship lead is just randomly sending dudes to tank? Don't you think he might have a good reason for the batting order that might, just might, preempt your "good reason" (because it's in the book that way)? I'm not an advocate of flaunting the rules, but even on checkrides deviations are always tolerable as long as there is sound logic applied. The ATP-56(B) is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen and while that doesn't mean we can just toss it out the window, it does mean that the guidance contained therein is not above question. Just because you run the AR doesn't mean you have to be an inflexible dictator about it. Gas nazis!

[Hacker]

This is officially the most retarded thread currently on BaseOps.

[JarheadBoom]

Wow... this went to shit pretty quickly.

...One of my biggest pet peeves.

Really? Really boom? You want to know what my tail number is? ...FAIL.

Not all fighters have the tail # written in three places on the nose, but for fvck's sake, how hard is your job? Don't you guys have a book for this shit?

I'm not disputing your need to record the tail numbers, nor am I saying you should be able to see them at night. Obviously.

When I asked if you had a book for this shit, I wasn't talking about a log or record of tail numbers. I was talking about a pub or even simple gouge about your reciever. It's like you guys have never talked to each other before.

Again, don't you have a book for this shit? It's on the nose, granted, in slightly cryptic form. But it's not rocket science: "10978" = 81-978, "90251" = 79-251. If the boom blocks it, look before or after contact.

It's NOT always on the nose, and it's not always legible. Se the attached photo for an example from my collection. What's the lead digit in that tailnumber?

I've occasionally seen the numbers painted upside-down (always on LGPOS - WTF is up with that?!?), I've seen only 3 digits (which does me no good), and I've seen no tailnumber near the receptacle at all.

"The book" of tailnumbers is actually an Excel spreadsheet that each ARW/AMW's WRDCO (shoeclerk in charge of fuels) sends out to us. The most recent file has 15,213 tailnumbers in it, and it's not exactly user-friendly. I don't have a laptop in the ARO with me to look up each tail as it cycles across the boom, and I'm certain the -135 booms don't have one in their little pod, either. I've been banging my head against the wall with our WRDCO to try to get the spreadsheet broken into separate workbooks for each branch's airplanes, but so far I seem to be the only one who sees the benefit of this; after all, I couldn't care less about tailnumbers of Kiowa Warriors, Blackhawks, Chinooks, T-38s, T-6s, slick Herks, or any other aircraft that isn't AR-capable, but they're all in there.

Speaking of head-banging, you haven't had fun until you argue with a WRDCO over the tailnumbers of the aircraft you refueled. I have literally been told, by our ground-bound civilian WRDCO, "No, Sergeant, that is not the tailnumber of the aircraft you refueled", even though I stood next to that particular aircraft on Wake Island, while getting an up-close tour of that brand-new F-18F. Even better is when he emails my Chief Boom and my SQ/CC and tells them that I didn't really refuel that aircraft, and that I wouldn't change the numbers just because he said so...

I'm not asking to be dickish, so don't take it that way. In my job we also support customers and although standardized procedures exist, different users have different preferences. I always flex to the user regardless of what the reg says; in fact our "flex to your demands" approach has made us very popular and useful. So with my experience, I'm curious why you'd tell the customers how it's going to be instead of the other way around? I know there are times when you have to tell the user "no" for whatever good reason, but if they want something and your only reason not to acquiesce is because you are using a standard flow and you don't want to modify.... bro, that seems like exerting aurthority solely to exert authority and not helpful to the dudes in the fight.

I won't speak for the other booms/tanker pilots here, but personally I don't give a damn what order the fighters come across the boom... and frankly, I don't think it's any of my business whether the fighter lead wants to do 1-3-2-4, or 1-2-3-4, or whatever his preferred pecking order is. Just flow from the left wing to the right wing.

So, on that note... Fighter folks: without getting into any OPSEC issues (not that I can think of any associated with this question, but whatever...), why would you want to flow right-to-left, or split your flight to the left AND the right, on the initial rejoin with the tanker?

Here's the right answer 99% of the time: Put the boom down if you're ready for the rcvrs and let the fighters quickflow in the order they see fit and you'll see the greatest asset utilization with the least comm.

In the 3 years I've been doing this (yeah, I know... FNG thinks he knows it all...) I have YET to hear the word "QUICKFLOW" uttered over the radio from a receiver.

That's all it takes, fighter guys - if you want to quickflow, all you have to do is say the word "QUICKFLOW" before you assume the position formerly known as precontact, and you have satisfied the coordination requirements for quickflow procedures.

Not everyone flies a Hog. Therefore not all jets were built in the same years as the hog. Just because your tail number is 10978, that '1' could mean 61, 71, 81, 91, 01, etc.

Shack.

*edit to fix a quote

Edited March 12, 2010 by JarheadBoom

[skinny]

Again, dude, I'm NOT talking about a book of tail numbers. I'm talking about anything that gives you TTP's for refueling. Does that make sense, or is the concept that foreign? ...Something that tells you, for example, that every A-10 flying today rolled off the production line between '78 and '82....and therefore the easy technique for how to read the tail number.

Short answer, no, that sort of gouge doesn't exist. Should it? Who knows. Dude, all I can say is, lowest common denominator. Sure the 10 year vet knows how to read a tail number. But to expect an 18 year old kid wet behind the ears to know the shit you're spewing isn't feasible. Those things come with time and experience.

Do I expect you to know that the Hog wasn't flying in 1961? Well, YES, actually. Reference my comment above about studying/briefing/having/knowing the books/gouge. It may seem minor, but it speaks to the same level of ignorance that causes the tanker to not know what altitudes/airspeeds we can refuel at, or that we don't have a radar, or how to effect the rejoin faster. It's part of being an expert in something. Think I step to the jet not having a baseline knowledge of what radios a JTAC carries, or what the EM diagram for the A/A threat looks like, or what the frag cylinder of a Mk-82 is, or exactly what SCL the B-1 is carrying, or...etc. etc.?

Absolutely it's about being an expert. But were you an expert straight out of RTU!? Didn't think so. Your job was to say "4" and nothing else, unless someone was putting lives in danger. Were you rock solid on the boom at DM? Probably not, but it came with time didn't it? And I'm sure the boom was patient with your lack of experience. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that you're the guy that thinks because you can see the receptacle and the boom, you want to make your own contact. Stop me if I'm wrong here. SH if you can do that, but you'd be wrong. Just park the damn thing and I'll make sure you get your gas.

The reason fighter pilots get frustrated with tankers is because tanking should be easy. It's ADMIN. It's motherhood. It's a means to an end. The autopilot is on, there's two pilots and one boom, blah blah blah...

You're right, it should be easy. So pass me your 6 digits and be done with it! How's that for simple?

Edit to add: I'm not trying to start a flame war here. 99.99999% of the guys I've refueled have been top notch and 99.99999% of the tanker crews I've been on have always attempted to whatever could be done to proved a better service to the customer/receiver. As much as we hate to admit it, as tankers, we are in the customer service business; not always for the guy on the boom but usually for the guys in the mud. This ENTIRE thread is talking about that .00001% when it didn't quite go so well. That's all I've got.

Edited March 12, 2010 by skinny

[Alpharatz]

What? When was that? I suppose it hit the Caliente Hospital, too. New Thunderdome restriction SFC-UNL 200nm radius?

Many, many moons ago senor...and yes, the Caliente Hospital was completely destroyed

Also...I apologize for Annex C. Is "New Thunderdome" a re-make?

"I wonder how a couple of hostile fighters loose in the airspace would change things"

[Guest]

I won't speak for the other booms/tanker pilots here, but personally I don't give a damn what order the fighters come across the boom... and frankly, I don't think it's any of my business whether the fighter lead wants to do 1-3-2-4, or 1-2-3-4, or whatever his preferred pecking order is. Just flow from the left wing to the right wing.

I like everything except the last part. Not sure why it should matter to you about the direction of flow. You can't clear the next 4-ship to the left wing while the last guy in the previous 4-ship is on the boom with three jets on the right wing anyway.

So, on that note... Fighter folks: without getting into any OPSEC issues (not that I can think of any associated with this question, but whatever...), why would you want to flow right-to-left, or split your flight to the left AND the right, on the initial rejoin with the tanker?

First, there are no lost wingman procedures for #5. Second, it sucks enough to be on the wing at night. It suck exponentially as you add more jets to look through.

In the 3 years I've been doing this (yeah, I know... FNG thinks he knows it all...) I have YET to hear the word "QUICKFLOW" uttered over the radio from a receiver.

That's all it takes, fighter guys - if you want to quickflow, all you have to do is say the word "QUICKFLOW" before you assume the position formerly known as precontact, and you have satisfied the coordination requirements for quickflow procedures.

That's a shame, I guess most fighter guys don't do that anymore or they're not in a hurry. What's worse is that there is any requirement to say the word quickflow at all. Two jets go to the wing and two jets go to the boom the flight manages the quickflow across the boom from there, you just give them gas and they leave. Easier, quieter and faster for everyone.

Many, many moons ago senor...and yes, the Caliente Hospital was completely destroyed

Also...I apologize for Annex C. Is "New Thunderdome" a re-make?

OK, I was around a few moons ago. Can you tell me when a "live missile" was fired through your flight during a Red Flag refueling or not?

[Guest Crew Report]

The reason fighter pilots get frustrated with tankers is because tanking should be easy. It's ADMIN. It's motherhood. It's a means to an end. The autopilot is on, there's two pilots and one boom, and you have a shit ton of radios at your disposal. It's supposed to be easy but you have booms and pilots alike that have problems with tail numbers or positional awareness. Fighter pilots are not infallible and we dick it up on occasion too, but you will not convince me that having a shred of SA or knowing basic details about each of your receivers is too much for you to handle.

No, you have fighter pilots who get sometimes pissy when asked the same question that's been asked for the past 50+ years the KC-135 and 20+ years the KC-10 has been flying. This isn't something that came out in recent years, it's always been asked. You have Eagle guys who don't want to pass it over the comm at Red Flag and then you have Viper guys who have no problem giving the info over Afghanistan. I had a Hawg guy ask me the other day how much his offload was in pounds and gallons...WTF...Google it. And for the record I do look at the tail number by the receptacle because one out of three times the tail number the dude told me was wrong. I guess tanker guys have a problem with this because I think you guys seem to forget we refuel everyone, Navy/Marines, foreign, heavies, etc. And in my experience USAF fighter guys are the ones who occasionally give tanker crews shit for the most trivial thing.

I also realize that tanker guys and fighter guys (like you said) are not infallible and people sometimes make mistakes.

[Guest]

You have Eagle guys who don't want to pass it over the comm at Red Flag...

They do it properly.

...and then you have Viper guys who have no problem giving the info over Afghanistan.

Fail.

I had a Hawg guy ask me the other day how much his offload was in pounds and gallons...WTF...Google it.

HA! No shit?! He didn't ask for liters?

Thanks for this, it made me laugh out loud. What a dumbass.

And in my experience USAF fighter guys are the ones who occasionally give tanker crews shit for the most trivial thing.

And that pales in comparison to the shit they give each other for what most would consider even more trivial things. The "everything counts" and "if you can keep score or time it's a competition" culture is what makes the USAF the single most dominant military unit of any type in the history of the planet.

A lot of the top guys and girls in pilot training are no longer geared towards the "fighter mentality" and are putting T-1 or T-44s first - whether it's because they want to travel and see the world, work with a crew, or are just turned off by the recent drops, and the likelyhood of not getting a fighter if they track T-38s.

Hence the term SNAP. It ain't Burger King.

[OL Patch]

This is officially the most retarded thread currently on BaseOps.

Except for Rainman attempting to, as expected and appreciated, tell it like it was/is/should be....2....I am getting old.

retguy

[Guest]

Is it really that much of a damn pain to show some common ######ing courtesy and pass your tail number? Is it really that painful to do something every single tanker asks for, and every receiver happily provides (except you).

I remember when, for accounting purposes only, we had to start passing tail numbers to the tankers. Aside from my disdain for ever having to talk to the tanker when there were emcon procedures that allowed for no comm...I admit, I never knew what tail number I was in (other than the last 3) or what year my jet was made. I didn't give a shit. The tanker guys didn't give a shit either but they were shit on by everyone in their wing from the Wg/CC on down if they didn't get a tail number because SAC or AMC or whomever owned the tankers back when this started wanted to charge the jets taking the gas. There was more than once when they forgot to ask and we forgot to give and the tanker ops would just call the squadron and get the info anyway.

This is a comptroller issue and we could improve this process. It seems like this is something that could be worked out through 1COs at the respective ops desks and leave the pilots and boom operators out of it. That said, I really still don't understand why anyone would need tail number level of detail. Just charge the respective wing and call it good.

I wonder how AMC charged the gas that I used to have the C-17s offload into the blivets when we started Bagram up. The C-17s were the only thing that kept that base running for the first six months since there was no other way to get fuel to us and everything, including the jets, the generators and the heaters in our GP mediums with dirt floors, ran on JP-8.

We should be shitting on the comptrollers, not each other.

Beer light is on. Happy Friday.

Cheers to the boys downrange, whatever you're flying.

[Guest Crew Report]

I remember when, for accounting purposes only, we had to start passing tail numbers to the tankers. Aside from my disdain for ever having to talk to the tanker when there were emcon procedures that allowed for no comm...I admit, I never knew what tail number I was in (other than the last 3) or what year my jet was made. I didn't give a shit. The tanker guys didn't give a shit either but they were shit on by everyone in their wing from the Wg/CC on down if they didn't get a tail number because SAC or AMC or whomever owned the tankers back when this started wanted to charge the jets taking the gas. There was more than once when they forgot to ask and we forgot to give and the tanker ops would just call the squadron and get the info anyway.

This is a comptroller issue and we could improve this process. It seems like this is something that could be worked out through 1COs at the respective ops desks and leave the pilots and boom operators out of it. That said, I really still don't understand why anyone would need tail number level of detail. Just charge the respective wing and call it good.

I wonder how AMC charged the gas that I used to have the C-17s offload into the blivets when we started Bagram up. The C-17s were the only thing that kept that base running for the first six months since there was no other way to get fuel to us and everything, including the jets, the generators and the heaters in our GP mediums with dirt floors, ran on JP-8.

We should be shitting on the comptrollers, not each other.

Beer light is on. Happy Friday.

Cheers to the boys downrange, whatever you're flying.

Just so you know 1C0's do not do the same job in a AMC squadron that they do in fighter squadrons. Most ARS's I've been part of don't have Ops Desks. I agree that this needs to be hashed out at a MAJCOM level. The AF was thinking about putting bar codes and a bar code scanner deal on KC-X so all the data would be scanned for the refueling without any headache (seriously). Don't know how that project is coming along (if it even is).

[OL Patch]

Beer light is on. Happy Friday.

Cheers to the boys downrange, whatever you're flying.

Couldn't agree more as I'm drinking my 3rd/4th (lost count) Brooklyn Brand--East India Pale Ale...a toast to the folks downrange gittin'r'done!

Cheers,

retguy