User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Aug 31, 2016 6:07 pm

Stitch wrote:

I'm pretty sure the KC-46A uses a standard 767-200ER wing (earlier RFPs were based on the 767-300F and perhaps even 767-400ER wing).

Boeing would have done wind tunnel and CFD testing prior to first flight and felt they had a handle on it based on both, but that is why certification agencies require the OEMs to actually fly the plane because modeling is not always 100% accurate.


Didn't Boeing have to strengthen the 767-300ER wing for the KC-46A? No civilian versions of the 767 ever needed to hang anything other than one engine off each wing. The A330 MRTT was able to use it's wing's heritage as being designed for both the A330 and A340 to its advantage. The A330 tanker attaches the WARP's to a hard point that is located where the #1 and #4 engines would attach on an A340. I don't see how a modified 767-300ER wing could be considered a standard 767-200ER or 767-300ER wing.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14987
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Aug 31, 2016 6:33 pm

Stitch wrote:
I'm pretty sure the KC-46A uses a standard 767-200ER wing (earlier RFPs were based on the 767-300F and perhaps even 767-400ER wing).


http://aviationweek.com/defense/boeing- ... t-campaign (behind avweek's paywall?) said:

Based on the 767-200ER baseline fuselage design, the -2C includes a strengthened main-deck cargo floor, cargo door and freighter features, strengthened 767-300ER wings, 767-400ER horizontal stabilizers, 787-based cockpit display system, auxiliary body tanks for increased fuel capacity and provisioning for the plumbing and wiring required for the refueling mission systems.


Therefore:

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Didn't Boeing have to strengthen the 767-300ER wing for the KC-46A?


The above reference suggests they did have to strengthen the 767-300ER wing for the KC-46A.

If you've followed our KC-46A threads it seems Boeing and the USAF have kept as many details to themselves as possible so we don't know if was specifically for the pods, but it seems to be a reasonable inference.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:38 pm

Ah, okay. I know the "Frankentanker" Boeing submitted for the RFP that the KC-45 had won was like a 767-200ER body, a 767-300F undercarriage and wings and maybe the 767-400ER horizontal stabilizers. I thought they went back to something closer to the original KC-767 for the last RFP, but it appears they had not.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14987
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:13 pm

Stitch wrote:
Ah, okay. I know the "Frankentanker" Boeing submitted for the RFP that the KC-45 had won was like a 767-200ER body, a 767-300F undercarriage and wings and maybe the 767-400ER horizontal stabilizers. I thought they went back to something closer to the original KC-767 for the last RFP, but it appears they had not.


As I said, it seems Boeing is doing its best to not reveal any of the details, presumably to avoid any 'frankentanker' criticism for what has now become 767-2C / KC-46A. Boeing itself even said it won't be a "frankentanker" - ref: http://www.seattletimes.com/business/bo ... mpetition/ - but it seems it probably is. And other than saying that I got the above from Aviation Week, I can't vouch for its accuracy, since Boeing itself is not telling us much if anything about it. I also found https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... en-347896/ which follows what you wrote, but is hard to trust since it switches back and forth between a named Boeing source and an unnamed other source.

For bonus points, here's how someone (presumably at N-G or allied with N-G) drew the original 'frankentanker':

Image

Apparently it had 767-400 flaps, not 767-400 horizontal stabilizers?

However, at this point, it's clear that for the franketanker, "It's Alive!".

Image

It's a great accomplishment, except for that part about spending around $2B more than intended to bring it to market.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:21 pm

I've just been hoping that Boeing will update the ACAPS with the 767-2C as that should tell us what we need to know.
 
CX747
Posts: 5691
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Sep 01, 2016 1:38 am

Was driving past the flight line the other day and saw numerous KC-135s awaiting their next mission. They are a good looking bird but I look forward to the arrival of new blood in the KC-46.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 22360
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Sep 08, 2016 3:09 pm

The first 19 tankers have been added to the order book.

Changes since last update: 19 new orders (BDS USAF Tanker Program for 19 767s).


http://www.boeing.com/commercial/
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:50 pm

The second production aircraft emerged from the paint hangar.

PAE, N884BA, 19 September 2016
Image
Original uploaded by Jennifer Schuld's Twitter, see : http://twitter.com/JenSchuld

L/N 1092 C/N 41983 B767-2LKC N884BA 16-46006 USAF KC46A (VH006) LRIP1/2
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 22360
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:40 am

Another KC-46A joined runway 11-29 for storage.

See https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/776903349270568960
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
KC135Hydraulics
Posts: 441
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:05 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:35 pm

When and where do they install the boom on these new production aircraft?
MSgt, USAF
KC-135R / C-17A Pneudraulic Systems Mechanic Supervisor
 
LMP737
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:48 pm

KC135Hydraulics wrote:
When and where do they install the boom on these new production aircraft?


At the EMC which is at the south end of Paine Field across the street from Paul Allen's museum. The hangar used to be owned by BF Goodrich.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:07 pm

In our wondrous world of computers nearly all of the engineers working the design have never physically flown, serviced, repaired, or built any part of an airplane. The engineers of the 60's were much more on the factory floor so the designs had more 'reality' built in.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 22360
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:17 pm

Another KC-46 on the move today:

Image
KC-46A by Woodys Aeroimages, on Flickr
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
WIederling
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:28 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
In our wondrous world of computers nearly all of the engineers working the design have never physically flown, serviced, repaired, or built any part of an airplane. The engineers of the 60's were much more on the factory floor so the designs had more 'reality' built in.


Now reliability and safety have increased several magnitudes going forward from those times.

IMU those heroes from the past where mostly "say so" heroes.
Compare to the myth created around the cowboy culture.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14987
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Oct 13, 2016 9:44 am

WIederling wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
In our wondrous world of computers nearly all of the engineers working the design have never physically flown, serviced, repaired, or built any part of an airplane. The engineers of the 60's were much more on the factory floor so the designs had more 'reality' built in.


Now reliability and safety have increased several magnitudes going forward from those times.

IMU those heroes from the past where mostly "say so" heroes.
Compare to the myth created around the cowboy culture.


There's truth in both statements.

At the start of my engineering career one dealt with much less volume of tasks but the need to get it right the first time was paramount. You didn't get many second chances. You had to use a lot more intuition (either your own or that of your colleagues) because there really was no way to simulate much of what we did. There was a lot more manual cross-checking of work.

Now we're all expected to work with a much larger volume of tasks and in many cases the work is much more about integrating things that others have done and there isn't as much expectation that it gets done right the first time. Drag, drop, cut, paste, join, reboot then see what happens. However the fact that you're integrating bigger blocks means you do often end up with safer and more reliable things, because each component does more and (if you're lucky) the bugs have largely been shaken out. Of course the issue becomes that people are rewarded by how many things they glue together, rather than how well they all act together as a whole. That always seems to be "someone else's problem" since no one person really knows how all these complicated widgets really work at their innermost level of detail and how they all interact with each other.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
WIederling
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Oct 13, 2016 2:44 pm

Revelation wrote:
There's truth in both statements.
....................


Yes :-)

The process is to swap ingenuity for process. :-)
Process has better reliability but you do not get there from a vacuum.

H.Wouk, The Caine Mutiny: The Military is a system set up by geniuses to allow reasonably bright persons to lead a bunch of imbeciles ( or wording to some similar gist. )
Murphy is an optimist
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:04 pm

Drove by Pease the other day, the new KC767 hangar mod to the KC-135 hangar mod to the B-47 nose dock hangars is coming along nicely.
Pilots are idiots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
boefan
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 6:33 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Mon Nov 14, 2016 8:04 am

Anyone can identify the following aircraft ?

Image231 by planesguy, on Flickr

Image263 by planesguy, on Flickr

Image264 by planesguy, on Flickr

Image265 by planesguy, on Flickr

Image266 by planesguy, on Flickr
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:15 pm

How many KC-46As are built enough to be sitting on their wheels?
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:09 pm

Twelve (12) KC-46A's are "sitting on their wheels "

L/N 1065 C/N 41273 B767-2LKC N461FT 11-46001 USAF KC-46A (VH001) EMD1
L/N 1066 C/N 41274 B767-2LKC N464KC 11-46004 USAF KC-46A (VH002) EMD4
L/N 1067 C/N 34054 B767-2LKC N463FT 11-46003 USAF KC-46A (VH003) EMD3
L/N 1069 C/N 41275 B767-2LKC N462KC 11-46002 USAF KC-46A (VH004) EMD2

L/N 1091 C/N 41852 B767-2LKC N842BA 16-46005 USAF KC46A (VH005) LRIP1/1 painted
L/N 1092 C/N 41983 B767-2LKC N884BA 16-46006 USAF KC46A (VH006) LRIP1/2 painted

L/N 1098 C/N 41855 B767-2LKC 16-46007 USAF KC-46A (VH007) LRIP1/3 stored
L/N 1100 C/N 41856 B767-2LKC 16-46008 USAF KC-46A (VH008) LRIP1/4 stored
L/N 1102 C/N 41858 B767-2LKC 16-46009 USAF KC-46A (VH009) LRIP1/5 stored
L/N 1104 C/N 41859 B767-2LKC 16-46010 USAF KC-46A (VH010) LRIP1/6 stored
L/N 1107 C/N 34106 B767-2LKC 16-46011 USAF KC-46A (VH011) LRIP1/7 stored

L/N 1109 C/N 34107 B767-2LKC 16-46012 USAF KC-46A (VH012) LRIP2/1 stored
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:49 am

Update :

Thirteen (13) KC46A's are now " sitting on their wheels "

Added KC46A (after delivery of L/N 1112, the next sequential FEDEX 767-32SF):

L/N 1111 C/N ????? B767-2LKC 16-46013 USAF KC46A (VH013) LRIP2/2
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
CX747
Posts: 5691
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Fri Nov 25, 2016 7:37 pm

I can't wait to see that new metal on a USAF base.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:45 pm

747classic wrote:
Update :

Thirteen (13) KC46A's are now " sitting on their wheels "

Added KC46A (after delivery of L/N 1112, the next sequential FEDEX 767-32SF):

L/N 1111 C/N ????? B767-2LKC 16-46013 USAF KC46A (VH013) LRIP2/2


Thanks 747Classic.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Sat Dec 10, 2016 1:30 pm

N463FT , pictured at the Boeing Everett Modification Centre, December 08 2016

Image

Original uploaded at Matt Cawby's twitter, see : http://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/807002490235285505

Aircraft data : L/N 1067 C/N 34054 B767-2LKC N463FT 11-46003 USAF KC-46A (VH003) EMD3
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14987
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery Part 4

Sat Dec 10, 2016 7:16 pm

747classic wrote:
N463FT , pictured at the Boeing Everett Modification Centre, December 08 2016

Original uploaded at Matt Cawby's twitter, see : http://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/807002490235285505

Aircraft data : L/N 1067 C/N 34054 B767-2LKC N463FT 11-46003 USAF KC-46A (VH003) EMD3


Great photo, thanks for posting it! :thumbsup:
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:49 am

Another KC-46A is being moved from the Everett Modification Center to Runway 11/29 and is joining the KC-46A's that are already parked at that position.

KPAE, January 07 2017
Image

Original uploaded by Matt Cawby's twitter, see :http://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/817791707953496065
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Buckeyetech
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 1:11 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sat Jan 14, 2017 1:56 pm

Travis and McGuire AFB announced as the next tenants to operate the KC-46. I'm assuming they were chosen in order to retire the KC–10. The Air Force in the past has publicly said that they wanted to retire them to save money on the equipment unique to that airframe and supply chain. My question is would any secondhand civilian cargo airliners want them?

http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pa ... -46As.aspx
B-52H, C-141C, C-5A, C-17A
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sun Jan 15, 2017 9:56 am

"KC-46 schedule unlikely to go as planned " according the annual report of the Pentagon’s top weapons tester Michael Gilmore

- By the beginning of low-rate production last August though, Boeing had completed only 30% of EMD testing i.s.o. the scheduled 66 %.
- Execution of the current schedule assumes historically unrealistic test aircraft fly and re-fly rates
- The current boom represent a prototype rather than a production-ready design
- Boeing has only performed daylight refueling operations and none of the tested aircraft (A-10, F/A-18, AV-8B, C-17 and KC46) have been certified as receiving platforms.
- Electromagnetic pulse test have been delayed until April 2017

See : http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ed-433181/
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:04 am

Buckeyetech wrote:
My question is would any secondhand civilian cargo airliners want them?

I highly doubt it for civilian cargo. They may have a chance with Omega though, would be a lot of aircraft Omega could draw on and probably going cheap. http://www.omegaairrefueling.com/

Unless the USAF will hold on the the airframes themselves...
 
arluna
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:28 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sun Jan 15, 2017 8:51 pm

Ozair wrote:
Buckeyetech wrote:
My question is would any secondhand civilian cargo airliners want them?

I highly doubt it for civilian cargo. They may have a chance with Omega though, would be a lot of aircraft Omega could draw on and probably going cheap. http://www.omegaairrefueling.com/

Unless the USAF will hold on the the airframes themselves...


Or maybe transfer them to the Air Guard?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sun Jan 15, 2017 9:00 pm

I would expect the KC-10A fleet to be send to the Boneyard at Davis-Monthan.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:32 pm

747classic wrote:
"KC-46 schedule unlikely to go as planned " according the annual report of the Pentagon’s top weapons tester Michael Gilmore.


He's been tearing into the F-35 program, as well - viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1352617

Then again, the Pentagon's senior members note Mr. Gilmore “has never found anything he’s tested to be effective" because if it was, then his office is superfluous.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 1907
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Mon Jan 16, 2017 2:55 am

arluna wrote:
Or maybe transfer them to the Air Guard?


Highly unlikely. Reserve components equipment must mirror those found on the active duty side. USAF stated that leaning out the supply chain is one of the reasons for the KC-10 retirement. Sending it over the air guard keeps those same issues.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:55 pm

Once the KC-46 enters the fleet in significant numbers, the KC-10 becomes redundant.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:44 am

kc135topboom wrote:
Once the KC-46 enters the fleet in significant numbers, the KC-10 becomes redundant.


There are over 500 KC-135's to replace. At 2 per month that's over 20 years of production. There are 59 KC-10's. That's another 2.5 years of production. Are the KC46's going to have the capacity to replace the KC-10 fleet? The KC-10's are often used to refuel fighters when they are redeployed, because they can carry fuel freight and support personnel all on the same plane.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:48 am

flyingclrs727 wrote:
kc135topboom wrote:
Once the KC-46 enters the fleet in significant numbers, the KC-10 becomes redundant.


There are over 500 KC-135's to replace. At 2 per month that's over 20 years of production. There are 59 KC-10's. That's another 2.5 years of production. Are the KC46's going to have the capacity to replace the KC-10 fleet? The KC-10's are often used to refuel fighters when they are redeployed, because they can carry fuel freight and support personnel all on the same plane.


They'll just use two KC-46s instead of one KC-10 (or three instead of two).
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:27 am

If the KC-135R's are estimated to have a life extendable to 2040, is it possible the USAF might sell some to other air forces as KC-46's come online in the USAF?
 
User avatar
hilram
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:12 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 8:01 am

When is the KC-46 supposed to enter into service with the USAF? And what are the financial consequences of being late?
Flown on: A319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343 | B732, 734, 735, 736, 73G, 738, 743, 772, 77W | BAe-146 | DHC-6, 7, 8 | E195 | MD DC-9 41, MD-82, MD-87
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:30 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
There are over 500 KC-135's to replace. At 2 per month that's over 20 years of production.


They will not be replacing them one for one. And once full rate production is approved, they can increase the rate.

Besides, I don't think they will keep the line open for 20 years. Once Boeing decides to make a 787F (or a BWB freighter), they will work to close the 767 line.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 5876
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:31 pm

bikerthai wrote:
Besides, I don't think they will keep the line open for 20 years. Once Boeing decides to make a 787F (or a BWB freighter), they will work to close the 767 line.

As long as Boeing has profitable orders to fulfill for the 767 they would be in no rush to cancel the line, even if the only remaining orders are for the USAF. If Boeing decides to make the 787F and believes it overlaps with the 763F too much they would just kill off the 763F (like they have done with the 764 and 762). Remember that Boeing produced military 707 variants through 1991 despite the last civilian 707 being delivered in the late 70s.

That said I don't really see tanker production lasting 20 years.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 22360
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:58 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
kc135topboom wrote:
Once the KC-46 enters the fleet in significant numbers, the KC-10 becomes redundant.


There are over 500 KC-135's to replace. At 2 per month that's over 20 years of production. There are 59 KC-10's. That's another 2.5 years of production. Are the KC46's going to have the capacity to replace the KC-10 fleet? The KC-10's are often used to refuel fighters when they are redeployed, because they can carry fuel freight and support personnel all on the same plane.


I doubt the USAF would order 500 KC-46 tankers, the RFP was for 179 aircraft to be delivered by 2028.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14987
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:12 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
kc135topboom wrote:
Once the KC-46 enters the fleet in significant numbers, the KC-10 becomes redundant.


There are over 500 KC-135's to replace. At 2 per month that's over 20 years of production. There are 59 KC-10's. That's another 2.5 years of production. Are the KC46's going to have the capacity to replace the KC-10 fleet? The KC-10's are often used to refuel fighters when they are redeployed, because they can carry fuel freight and support personnel all on the same plane.


That's the key question to ask. If the USAF can simply eliminate the 59 frames, why hasn't it done it a long time ago? And why not keep eliminating KC-135Rs if 179 KC-46s are going to be enough? The answer is of course they need the capacity. They're still kicking around the KC-Y program after all. They just need a sacrificial lamb to pay for the outrageously expensive F-35s they are trying to fit into the budget. And the KC-10 is an easy target, because it gets rid of an entire family of aircraft.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:24 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
kc135topboom wrote:
Once the KC-46 enters the fleet in significant numbers, the KC-10 becomes redundant.


There are over 500 KC-135's to replace. At 2 per month that's over 20 years of production. There are 59 KC-10's. That's another 2.5 years of production. Are the KC46's going to have the capacity to replace the KC-10 fleet? The KC-10's are often used to refuel fighters when they are redeployed, because they can carry fuel freight and support personnel all on the same plane.


I doubt the USAF would order 500 KC-46 tankers, the RFP was for 179 aircraft to be delivered by 2028.


The RFP was for an initial 179 planes to replace the National Guard KC-135E aircraft that had TF33 engines. Those were the highest priority planes to replace first, because of corrosion issues with their engine mounts.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:28 pm

hilram wrote:
When is the KC-46 supposed to enter into service with the USAF?


Original plan was Spring 2017, but more likely it will be late 2017. All of the initial tranche of 18 are due for delivery by January 2018 from the latest reports I have seen.


hilram wrote:
And what are the financial consequences of being late?


Well there are no penalties, but Boeing is responsible for all the overruns (to the tune of some $1.5 billion to date).


KarelXWB wrote:
I doubt the USAF would order 500 KC-46 tankers, the RFP was for 179 aircraft to be delivered by 2028.


Agreed, but I do expect them to order more than 179 through the life of the program. I also expect the platform to serve as the replacement for the E-3 AWACS birds.
 
WIederling
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:36 pm

Aviaponcho wrote:
Tailboom can increase the so called lenght maybe

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/bds/gl ... KC767A.pdf

KC767 is 19 pallet on main deck a lot o equipement near the rear door...
So ?


the -300F has 24 pallet positions.
the -200 is 6.5m shorter or ~3 pallets

i.e. a 767-200F ( if it existed 9 would have 21 88x108 pallet positions on main deck?
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:38 pm

WIederling wrote:
i.e. a 767-200F ( if it existed 9 would have 21 88x108 pallet positions on main deck?


Main deck capacity is 11 96x125" ULDs or 20 88x108x96" ULDs based on 767-200 converted freighters.
 
trex8
Posts: 4746
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:47 pm

New charge Q4??
Boeing said it took an aftertax tanker-related charge of $201 million in the fourth quarter due to initial production problems.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-boein ... SKBN1591FV

edit
its actually more than that 312 million. http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2017-01-25- ... 7-Guidance
Commercial Airplanes fourth-quarter revenue increased to $16.2 billion on higher planned delivery volume and mix (Table 4). Fourth-quarter operating margin was 9.1 percent, reflecting delivery mix, lower R&D and improved performance, partially offset by a $243 million pre-tax charge on the KC-46 Tanker program primarily related to additional effort to incorporate previously identified changes into initial production aircraft.

AND

Defense, Space & Security's fourth-quarter revenue was $6.9 billion (Table 5). Fourth-quarter operating margin was 11.8 percent, reflecting a $69 million pre-tax charge on the KC-46 Tanker program at BMA, partially offset by solid execution.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 14009
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:56 pm

trex8 wrote:
its actually more than that 312 million.


I think that pushes them over the $2billion mark on cost over-runs for the tanker.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
WIederling
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:03 am

scbriml wrote:
trex8 wrote:
its actually more than that 312 million.


I think that pushes them over the $2billion mark on cost over-runs for the tanker.


Developement and first 4 test frames was estimated to cost less than $5b.
What was the projected bill for devel + 4 proto + ?17? first batch frames?
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4304
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: KC-46 Production, Testing And Delivery

Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:42 am

WIederling wrote:
scbriml wrote:
trex8 wrote:
its actually more than that 312 million.


I think that pushes them over the $2billion mark on cost over-runs for the tanker.


Developement and first 4 test frames was estimated to cost less than $5b.
What was the projected bill for devel + 4 proto + ?17? first batch frames?


The first LRIP contract, issued in August 2016 for two batches (7 and 12 aircraft, plus spares) was set at $2.8Billion.

http://www.combataircraft.net/2016/08/1 ... -contract/

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bikerthai and 2 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