- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Boeing 777X’s fuselage split dramatically during September stress test
Posted on 11/29/19 at 3:43 pm to BHM
Posted on 11/29/19 at 3:43 pm to BHM
quote:Are nearly identical
Fuel burn rates.
quote:What 767’s does the Air Force currently have?
Pilot training. Military already has 767 pilots.
Aircraft maintenance and parts stock. Already has 767s.
2
Posted on 11/29/19 at 3:53 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
Identical fuel burn rates, the KC45 would have already been in service, a PROVEN design able to carry more fuel or cargo.
The difference? Blue state jobs vs Red.
The difference? Blue state jobs vs Red.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 4:24 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
Fuel burn rate varies advantages vary by trip distance but yes, it is close. My point was that fuel capacity was not the only major concern.
Yes, I was mistaken on 767s being in the fleets. I was certain there was a 767 freighter but I guess it was the KC-767 stuck in my head.
My apologies on that one.
Yes, I was mistaken on 767s being in the fleets. I was certain there was a 767 freighter but I guess it was the KC-767 stuck in my head.
My apologies on that one.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 4:32 pm to antibarner
I dont want my american tax dollars spent with foreign defense contractors.
Keep the money at home.
frick airbus.
Keep the money at home.
frick airbus.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 4:37 pm to antibarner
quote:
The Air Force wanted the KC45..but Obama wanted to give the contract to Washington State, a blue state, over Alabama, a red state. Which is what happened.
It had nothing to do with red state vs blue state. It was an exceptional AMERICAN company vs EU bottom feeder company. In the end when Boeing got the contract America won.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 4:45 pm to antibarner
quote:
Wrong. the KC 45 was to be based on the A330 MRTT (Multi Role Tanker Transport) whose maiden flight was back in 2007.
You don't know what you're talking about. The design was proven and the KC45 was to be fitted with the same components used by the A330 MRTT. The same refueling boom, same underwing pods and fuselage refueling unit.
It was my understanding that Airbus was only supplying the airframe and Northrop was doing the refueling portion. What was Northrops role? I thought they were developing an advanced refueling system?
Posted on 11/29/19 at 4:50 pm to BHM
I’m not sure a new refueling system would need to be developed. All NATO countries use standardized refueling probes if I’m not mistaken.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 4:54 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
Are you still in the industry?
Not anymore. I ended up in Investment Banking. I still have a strong affinity for the industry and keep up with it some. I have done several deals in it.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 5:06 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I’m not sure a new refueling system would need to be developed. All NATO countries use standardized refueling probes if I’m not mistaken.
There was a recent issue with refueling F-15 planes with similar receptacles using the Airbus tanker. Not sure if it was new issue that just showed up or if it was during test phases.
This post was edited on 11/29/19 at 5:08 pm
Posted on 11/29/19 at 7:06 pm to BHM
I have no knowledge of that. I do know that tanker has been in service with the UK, the Australians, UAE and the Saudis.
South Korea has accepted delivery in early 2019, the French are acquiring them, and others.
South Korea has accepted delivery in early 2019, the French are acquiring them, and others.
Posted on 11/29/19 at 7:41 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I’m not sure a new refueling system would need to be developed. All NATO countries use standardized refueling probes if I’m not mistaken.
Sort of correct. Aircraft like the eurofighter2k and the rafale use the probe and drogue system(female end on tanker looking like a badminton shuttlecock and the male end is on the reciever aircraft) as does most of the us navy and marines. The USAF uses flying boom and receptacle system, the male end on the tanker and reciever is on the jet. Fun fact USAF Vietnam workhorse F-105 had both types of in flight refuelling capability
Posted on 11/29/19 at 7:57 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
You are such a clown.
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News