ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:10 am

trpmb6 wrote:
ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

In this case I've got to give the Boeing sales and engineering teams props for thinking about removing such equipment to reduce sustainment costs.


Wasn't just Boeing ;) but I'll pass along kudos to relevant folks.

As for the weight savings and improved fuel payload I can't say. i dont know the true final number, and even if I did I wouldn't share that.


Well whoever was involved. A great example of delivering to the spec by doing the less obvious things.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 886
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:29 pm

Just from memory the 1st RFP had the more typical DOD contract structure, basically a cost plus fixed margin type where if the unit cost goes up $ 10M the contractor receives $12M. NG loves those kinds of contracts as there is little risk. When it became the 2nd RFP it was changed to a fixed unit price for the initial batch then a modest escalator based on a price index. Much higher risk, but similar risk to commercial contracts. NG probably felt that it could be squeezed from AB below and the Gov't above, so they bailed.

Boeing is hurting on this first batch, but is probably OK with the follow on batches to 179. If it continues past 179 the contract price is renegotiated then, basically as a sole source. The gravy is support and those planes past 179.

The pace of drones is sufficient that the AF may not go past 179, instead get drone tankers.
 
LMP737
Posts: 5637
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:42 pm

trpmb6 wrote:

The thrust reversers were specifically removed in favor of a fixed duct at the last minute under great secrecy. It was the ace in the hole against Airbus' proposal. It was a win-win-win scenario by removing them. Gained useful payload (more fuel) and reduced maintenance costs for a system the USAF didn't want anyways. Why fly around with thrust reversers you will never use? This was a no brainer and is well known as one of the reasons Boeing won the contract (besides you know all the lobbyists).


Where did you hear this? As I understand reversers were never a requirement in the first place.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2297
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:46 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
Just from memory the 1st RFP had the more typical DOD contract structure, basically a cost plus fixed margin type where if the unit cost goes up $ 10M the contractor receives $12M. NG loves those kinds of contracts as there is little risk. When it became the 2nd RFP it was changed to a fixed unit price for the initial batch then a modest escalator based on a price index. Much higher risk, but similar risk to commercial contracts. NG probably felt that it could be squeezed from AB below and the Gov't above, so they bailed.

Boeing is hurting on this first batch, but is probably OK with the follow on batches to 179. If it continues past 179 the contract price is renegotiated then, basically as a sole source. The gravy is support and those planes past 179.

The pace of drones is sufficient that the AF may not go past 179, instead get drone tankers.


I don't think the USAF is going to pay a cent more for the KC-46 than they did for the original 179. I think Boeing is gambling on the USAF paying more to help cover cost overruns from the original contract.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8133
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:57 pm

LMP737 wrote:
Where did you hear this? As I understand reversers were never a requirement in the first place.

As all RFP's were for off the shelf product based on a in service civilian a/c they were there somewhere....may not be mandated but expected and could stay or be removed with penalty for qualification....
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:17 pm

INFINITI329 wrote:
I don't think the USAF is going to pay a cent more for the KC-46 than they did for the original 179. I think Boeing is gambling on the USAF paying more to help cover cost overruns from the original contract.


The USAF is going to pay more if the data shows that they need to pay more.

Boeing has already taken the hit for the cost over run, they will not roll the cost into the next contract. New KC-46 contracts will be priced with consideration for inflation, improved manufacturing efficiency and a reasonable profit. Charging extra to make up for losses in previous batches will not be allowed. Boeing will not do this as it will risk breaking government contracting laws and losing]other government contracts.

par13del wrote:
As all RFP's were for off the shelf product based on a in service civilian a/c they were there somewhere....may not be mandated but expected and could stay or be removed with penalty for qualification....


Having not read the RFP, but it would be unlikely any mention of the T/R would be found in it. Typically RFPs are based on performance and not necessarily hardware. And since the T/Rs are not included in any certification performance requirements (FAA or other wise), it would be more difficult if you were to add them just to meet the performance requirements.

Bottom line is that the TR's are not required for the KC-46 or the KC-45 to meet the RFP (or FAA) requirements. Removing them would cost only a small amount of Engineering work to design them out of existing commercial nacelles while providing significant savings in cost and weight and complexity.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 1426
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:21 pm

par13del wrote:
LMP737 wrote:
Where did you hear this? As I understand reversers were never a requirement in the first place.

As all RFP's were for off the shelf product based on a in service civilian a/c they were there somewhere....may not be mandated but expected and could stay or be removed with penalty for qualification....


Quite right. As for specifics I cannot say. It's common knowledge among those familiar with it, and familiar with how the air force operates their tanker fleets. To be honest I'm not sure why Airbus didn't think to do it themselves either. There really is no reason to have a thrust reverser on a tanker considering the airports they operate out of.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25675
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:17 pm

Looks like issues with the Centerline Drogue System supplied by Cobham needs additional work to complete FAA certification and the head of Air Mobility Command said that until it is fixed "the KC-46A is not acceptable". Cobham estimates it will cost $52 million to complete the work and Boeing is withholding payments to them. Boeing says the CDS and WARPS (also a Cobham product) will be certified in time to make the October delivery date. Guess we'll have to see.

http://aviationweek.com/defense/will-kc ... 414c92bdff
 
LMP737
Posts: 5637
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:45 am

trpmb6 wrote:

Quite right. As for specifics I cannot say. It's common knowledge among those familiar with it, and familiar with how the air force operates their tanker fleets. To be honest I'm not sure why Airbus didn't think to do it themselves either. There really is no reason to have a thrust reverser on a tanker considering the airports they operate out of.


Common knowledge with who?
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2417
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:57 am

The next KC-46A at the Everett Modification Center :
L/N 1113, C/N 34105, B767-2LKC, 16-46014, USAF KC-46A, (VH014), LRIP 2, #03/12, tail 66014

Paine Field, August 11th 2018
Image

Original uploaded by Matt Cawby at twitter, see : https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/10 ... 4820687873
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
taru
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 8:03 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:37 pm

Boeing KC-46 attains FAA supplemental type certificate:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ic-451666/
 
User avatar
SamYeager2016
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:22 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Sep 06, 2018 2:49 pm

taru wrote:
Boeing KC-46 attains FAA supplemental type certificate:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ic-451666/


What was the original scheduled timescale for this?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25675
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Sep 11, 2018 5:05 pm

Boeing has been awarded a contract for a fourth tranche of KC-46A, totaling 18 units. This brings the current order book to 52.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2018-09-10- ... uction-Lot
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2417
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Sep 12, 2018 12:19 pm

Stitch wrote:
Boeing has been awarded a contract for a fourth tranche of KC-46A, totaling 18 units. This brings the current order book to 52.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2018-09-10- ... uction-Lot


Just in time.
The first aircraft of LRIP #4 is already at the 767 Final Assembly Line (FAL) :

L/N 1160 C/N xxxxx B767-2LKC 18-46039 USAF KC-46A (VH039) LRIP4, #01/18, tail 86039


Note : Total assembled 38 + 18 to be assembled = 56 aircraft.

Are the four EMD aircraft not included in the orderbook ?
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
sovietjet
Posts: 2642
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:32 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:11 pm

To me the stupidest decision was to remove the boomer's pod. You don't really save any weight or maintenance. It's just a window for crying out loud. And they are having all sorts of problems with the camera system. Sometimes, the simple things work best. The decision to go camera was unnecessary, stupid and expensive. It reminds me of the pen in space vs pencil joke from many years go.
 
Trololzilla
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 11:53 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:36 pm

sovietjet wrote:
It reminds me of the pen in space vs pencil joke from many years go.

But didn't the pen end up being the superior solution in the end?
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:51 pm

sovietjet wrote:
To me the stupidest decision was to remove the boomer's pod. You don't really save any weight or maintenance. It's just a window for crying out loud. And they are having all sorts of problems with the camera system. Sometimes, the simple things work best. The decision to go camera was unnecessary, stupid and expensive. It reminds me of the pen in space vs pencil joke from many years go.


Other companies have made it work. The A330 MRTT uses cameras with a boom instead of a window. And it saves you having to re-engineer the entire aft end to put a massive piece of glass in.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Sep 13, 2018 1:23 pm

sovietjet wrote:
And they are having all sorts of problems with the camera system.


As I recall, the only one problem with the camera system was a red herring. As discussed earlier, the issue with the boom scraping was not that the new system scraped any more than the old system. It's just that the Air Force wanted something better than the old system even though the contract did not account for the improvement. Boeing solved it through some software change, which would not have been possible with the window in the belly option.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Max Q
Posts: 6823
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:18 am

sovietjet wrote:
To me the stupidest decision was to remove the boomer's pod. You don't really save any weight or maintenance. It's just a window for crying out loud. And they are having all sorts of problems with the camera system. Sometimes, the simple things work best. The decision to go camera was unnecessary, stupid and expensive. It reminds me of the pen in space vs pencil joke from many years go.



Have to agree


This seems like technology for
technologies sake


Camera problems could end
a mission, the simplicity of
just looking out of a window
with a direct field of view really
can’t be beat
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:32 am

sovietjet wrote:
You don't really save any weight or maintenance.


Then why did they use the camera on the A330 tanker? To put a person on the aft lower lobe, you'll have to cut through the main deck floor panel, add the ladder, add the crew station hardware, including radios and oxygen connection. Can't say much about weight of the work station vs. the window station. But cost of the console would be much less than the mod for the belly window.

These cameras are probably more reliable than the fuel pumps on this plane. And can someone confirm if these cameras can zoom?

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:55 pm

Max Q wrote:
sovietjet wrote:
To me the stupidest decision was to remove the boomer's pod. You don't really save any weight or maintenance. It's just a window for crying out loud. And they are having all sorts of problems with the camera system. Sometimes, the simple things work best. The decision to go camera was unnecessary, stupid and expensive. It reminds me of the pen in space vs pencil joke from many years go.



Have to agree


This seems like technology for
technologies sake


Camera problems could end
a mission, the simplicity of
just looking out of a window
with a direct field of view really
can’t be beat



Seems to work fine on the A330 MRTT

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... _KC-30.jpg
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11058
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Sep 15, 2018 10:41 pm

The bottom line is even the best 3D cameras are still not as good as the old Mk.1 eyeball looking through a window for depth perception. The KC-767A/Js and the KC-30/A-330MRTTs have a generation of cameras that is one generation older than those on the KC-46. But these cameras just are not good enough, yet.

The Booms on all of these new generation of tankers are scraping receivers, but so is the Booms on the KC-135, KC-10, KC-707, and the KDC-10. It was the same even going back to the days of the KC-97s and KB-50s.

But those older tankers with Boom Pods have fewer incidents because the Boom Operator reacts directly to tanker, Boom, and receiver movements. Why? Being in the tail of the tanker allows the Boom Operator to feel the movements much quicker than being closer to the tankers center of gravity being between the cockpit and the wing. In other words, Boom Operators still fly by the 'seat of thier pants'.

Refueling in turbulence is always going to cause the boom to strike the receiver outside of the receptacle area, no matter which tanker it is..
 
FrancisBegbie
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:22 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:11 am

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:
Max Q wrote:
sovietjet wrote:
To me the stupidest decision was to remove the boomer's pod. You don't really save any weight or maintenance. It's just a window for crying out loud. And they are having all sorts of problems with the camera system. Sometimes, the simple things work best. The decision to go camera was unnecessary, stupid and expensive. It reminds me of the pen in space vs pencil joke from many years go.



Have to agree


This seems like technology for
technologies sake


Camera problems could end
a mission, the simplicity of
just looking out of a window
with a direct field of view really
can’t be beat



Seems to work fine on the A330 MRTT

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... _KC-30.jpg


To add: if my memory serves me correctly the Dutch also have been using cameras for about 20 years on their KDC10s. Fleet is so small that any major hiccups would have made the news here.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:43 am

kc135topboom wrote:
Refueling in turbulence is always going to cause the boom to strike the receiver outside of the receptacle area, no matter which tanker it is..


Well, seems to me then there'll comes a time when software will come into the loop that will react and anticipate faster than a human. . .

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2417
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Sep 18, 2018 3:26 pm

Two more KC-46A deficiencies are identified by the USAF :

The first new deficiency, which the service has labeled “No Indication of Inadvertent Boom Loads,” refers to situations where boom operators unintentionally provide an input into the flight control stick that induces loads on the boom while it is in contact with a receiver aircraft. The KC-46 currently has no way to notify the operator that this is happening.

The second deficiency was found when pilots of receiver aircraft reported that the boom is too stiff during the part of the process when the receiver plane moves forward into the fuel transfer zone.

See : https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-ne ... -jeopardy/
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 1426
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Sep 18, 2018 5:23 pm

747classic wrote:
Two more KC-46A deficiencies are identified by the USAF :

The first new deficiency, which the service has labeled “No Indication of Inadvertent Boom Loads,” refers to situations where boom operators unintentionally provide an input into the flight control stick that induces loads on the boom while it is in contact with a receiver aircraft. The KC-46 currently has no way to notify the operator that this is happening.

The second deficiency was found when pilots of receiver aircraft reported that the boom is too stiff during the part of the process when the receiver plane moves forward into the fuel transfer zone.

See : https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-ne ... -jeopardy/


First is likely solvable with some software. The data should be available, just need to deliver it to the operator in some form, on his screen or some alarm of some sort.

The second is not something easily solvable.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:32 pm

trpmb6 wrote:
747classic wrote:
Two more KC-46A deficiencies are identified by the USAF :

The first new deficiency, which the service has labeled “No Indication of Inadvertent Boom Loads,” refers to situations where boom operators unintentionally provide an input into the flight control stick that induces loads on the boom while it is in contact with a receiver aircraft. The KC-46 currently has no way to notify the operator that this is happening.

The second deficiency was found when pilots of receiver aircraft reported that the boom is too stiff during the part of the process when the receiver plane moves forward into the fuel transfer zone.

See : https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-ne ... -jeopardy/


First is likely solvable with some software. The data should be available, just need to deliver it to the operator in some form, on his screen or some alarm of some sort.

The second is not something easily solvable.


Second one should be if thye've got pressure sensors and motors on the boom. Some tweaks to the software to have it retract the boom a bit when needed.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 1426
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:46 pm

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

Second one should be if thye've got pressure sensors and motors on the boom. Some tweaks to the software to have it retract the boom a bit when needed.


Ahhh.. I was thinking from the aspect of the boom being too stiff and unforgiving between the two aircraft, as if you were basically being dragged around by the boom. You're right, that should just be a change to the snubbing in the hydraulics.
 
Sooner787
Posts: 2223
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:56 pm

Deliver the damn planes, let the front line flight crews get used to working with their new planes
and all these squawks will be solved.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8133
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:22 am

Sooner787 wrote:
Deliver the damn planes, let the front line flight crews get used to working with their new planes
and all these squawks will be solved.

...or the front line crew will finally identify real issues versus the delaying that is taking place, methinks there have been some issues which could have been avoided or at least not use for major delays, the scraping issue sticks....
Now we read that the US Air Force cannot absorb 18 tankers delivered in the space of a couple months, really, for a product that has been delayed a couple years which are more efficient / economical and may allow more flying hours....which pilots don't want to fly?
Unless they are using delays to cover pilot shortfall...
 
Ozair
Posts: 2986
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:06 am

par13del wrote:
Sooner787 wrote:
Deliver the damn planes, let the front line flight crews get used to working with their new planes
and all these squawks will be solved.

...or the front line crew will finally identify real issues versus the delaying that is taking place, methinks there have been some issues which could have been avoided or at least not use for major delays, the scraping issue sticks....
Now we read that the US Air Force cannot absorb 18 tankers delivered in the space of a couple months, really, for a product that has been delayed a couple years which are more efficient / economical and may allow more flying hours....which pilots don't want to fly?
Unless they are using delays to cover pilot shortfall...

The aircraft will still have to go through OT&E so plenty of time to learn the jet and the quirks, as well as ensure it meets requirements.

I can understand the USAF not being able to take so many jets so quickly, they haven't had pilots sitting around waiting so the work up to ramp up.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3873
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:31 pm

OK it's October and Boeing is supposed to be delivering some of these tankers... so is anything happening or has the date slid again and I missed noting it.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25675
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:42 pm

I believe they still need the Military Type Certificate from the USAF to be granted before they can begin deliveries. They have the Amended Type Certificate for the 767-2C and last month received the Supplemental Type Certificate for the KC-46A configuration (both from the FAA).
 
Slafter
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:38 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:43 pm

To no one's surprise, SecAF says Boeing won't make the 27 October delivery date. Boeing still hoping for first delivery in 2018.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-17/boeing-s-tanker-to-miss-delivery-date-air-force-s-wilson-says
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25675
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:58 pm

And the new delay was due directly to the lack of the MTC, which is not ready due to the STC having taken longer than the USAF expected. So sounds like once the USAF issues the MTC, deliveries can commence even if there remain deficiencies to be corrected.
 
User avatar
RobK
Posts: 3483
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:43 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:47 am

Gentlemen, could you take your Airbus vs Boeing tanker discussion to one of the numerous threads that already exist for that purpose please. The topic and arguments have been done to death and I'm sure I'm not alone in not wishing to see this thread derailed with the same tired old arguments being rehashed by fanboys on each side of the fence. Thank you.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:53 pm

kanban wrote:
OK it's October and Boeing is supposed to be delivering some of these tankers... so is anything happening or has the date slid again and I missed noting it.


Speculation from a contract with an event organizer (port-a-potties and chairs) that the ceremony will be on or around November 16th.

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/av ... 90225.html

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
itchief
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 10:15 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:35 pm

Boeing adds $179M in cost overruns to KC-46 aircraft as delivery draws near

https://www.defensenews.com/industry/20 ... rd%20Brief

Boeing’s new aerial refueler stops at Yokota after maiden trans-Pacific flight

https://www.stripes.com/news/boeing-s-n ... rd%20Brief
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2417
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Oct 27, 2018 5:04 am

The second KC-46A out of Lot 4 of 18 aircraft, the 40th built, is at the Everett Modification Center.


L/N 1162, C/N xxxxx, B767-2LKC, 18-46040, USAF KC-46A, (VH040) LRIP4, #02/18, tail 86040
Image

Original uploaded by Matt Cawby at twitter, see : https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/10 ... 2718627840
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
PeterCL
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:36 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:46 pm

STATUS: LOG AND REQUEST FOR PAE AND BFI 25/10/18
PAE: 76029 76034 76033 76025 76032 76027 76035 N6009F N5514J N5514K 56010 56011 76036 76026 76024 plus line numbers 1098 1100 1109 1111 1162
BFI : N462KC N464KC N842BA N5513X 76028 66022 86009 66023

REQUEST: 1x green KC outside main producing hall plus 2 virtually complete inside( 3 others under construction- fuselages). Ix green outside EMC and 2 painted inside EMC. Cheers.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 3890
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Fri Nov 16, 2018 1:41 pm

bikerthai wrote:
kanban wrote:
OK it's October and Boeing is supposed to be delivering some of these tankers... so is anything happening or has the date slid again and I missed noting it.


Speculation from a contract with an event organizer (port-a-potties and chairs) that the ceremony will be on or around November 16th.

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/av ... 90225.html

bt

Today's the supposed date. Anyone heard any other info?
The last of the famous international playboys

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos