Jump to content
Baseops Forums


Supreme User
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


b52gator last won the day on May 23 2018

b52gator had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

108 Excellent

About b52gator

  • Rank
    Flight Lead

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

8,567 profile views
  1. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vintage-b-17-plane-crashes-erupts-flames-bradley-international-airport-n1061161
  2. zYikes https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2019/09/11/air-force-restricts-kc-46-from-carrying-cargo-and-personnel/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Breaking News 09.11.19&utm_term=Editorial - Breaking News WASHINGTON — In a move that could have major impacts on the already-delayed tanker program, the Air Force has indefinitely barred the KC-46 from carrying cargo and passengers, Defense News has learned. The decision was made after an incident occurred where the cargo locks on the bottom of the floor of the aircraft became unlocked during a recent flight, creating concerns that airmen could potentially be hurt or even killed by heavy equipment that suddenly bursts free during a flight. “As a result of this discovery, the Air Force has submitted a Category 1 deficiency report and is working with Boeing to identify a solution,” Air Force Mobility Command spokesman Col. Damien Pickart said in a statement. The service uses the term Category 1 describe serious technical issues that could endanger the aircrew and aircraft or have other major effects. “Until we find a viable solution with Boeing to remedy this problem, we can’t jeopardize the safety of our aircrew and this aircraft,” he said. The problem was discovered during a recent overseas operational test and evaluation flight, when KC-46 aircrew noticed that numerous cargo restraint devices had come unlocked over the course of the multiple legs of the trip. “Prior to departing for each of these missions, aircrew fully installed, locked and thoroughly inspected each restraint, and performed routine inspections of the restraints in flight,” Pickart said. “Despite these safety measures, the unlocking of cargo floor restraints occurred during flight, although no cargo or equipment moved and there was no specific risk to the aircraft or crew.” A source with knowledge of the issue told Defense News that if all restraints on a particular pallet had become unlocked, it would be able to roll freely throughout the cabin. If all cargo became unlatched, it could pose a safety risk to aircrew or even unbalance the aircraft — making the plane “difficult, if not impossible” to control. While this problem has only been observed on one KC-46, the Air Force does not have enough information to rule out other aircraft having a similar defect. The problem also poses a danger to the tanker’s operational test schedule, Pickart said. The program was set to start initial operational test and evaluation this fall, with pre-IOT&E activites already initiated. “This is a multi-mission aircraft, it’s for carrying cargo and passengers, it’s for refueling and also the aeromedical evacuation mission,” he said. “If you can’t carry cargo pallets and patient litters, a significant amount of your core missions cannot be properly tested.” In a statement, KC-46 manufacturer Boeing acknowledged that it had been notified of the new issue. “The company and the Air Force are cooperatively analyzing the locks to determine a root cause,” Boeing stated. “The safety of KC-46 aircraft and crew is our top priority. Once a cause has been identified, the tanker team will implement any required actions as quickly as possible.” The latest Cat-1 deficiency brings the total up to four: The tanker’s remote vision system or RVS — the camera system that allows KC-46 boom operators to steer the boom into a receiver aircraft without having to look out a window and use visual cues — provides imagery in certain lighting conditions that appears warped or misleading. Boeing has agreed to pay for potentially extensive hardware and software fixes, but the Air Force believes it will be three or four years until the system is fully functional. The Air Force has recorded instances of the boom scraping against the airframe of receiver aircraft. Boeing and the Air Force believe this problem is a symptom of the RVS’s acuity problems and will be eliminated once the camera system is fixed. Boeing must redesign the boom to accommodate the A-10, which currently does not generate the thrust necessary to push into the boom for refueling. This problem is a requirements change by the Air Force, which approved Boeing’s design in 2016. Last month, Boeing received a $55.5 million contract to begin work on the new boom actuator. While the KC-46 program has clocked several key milestones this year, it has also hit some publicly embarrassing stumbles. After several years of delays, the Air Force finally signed off on the acceptance of the first tanker. However, due to the list of technical problems, Boeing was forced to accept an agreement where the service could withhold up to $28 million per aircraft upon delivery. About $360 million has been withheld so far, Defense One reported in July. The Air Force plans to buy 179 KC-46s over the life of the program, and 52 are currently on contract. So far, Boeing has delivered 18 tankers to McConnell Air Force Base, Kan., and Altus Air Force Base, Okla. But deliveries were interrupted earlier this year by the discovery of foreign object debris in multiple planes. The Air Force suspended KC-46 flights at Boeing’s production line in Everett, Wash., this February after finding debris. Then it paused all tanker deliveries in March as the service investigated the extent of the problem. The service began accepting tankers again later that month, only for deliveries to stop — and restart — in April due to similar problems. Will Roper, the service’s acquisition executive, told reporters at the Paris Air Show this July that the service expects to find foreign object debris in KC-46s moving through the line, and it may be months before planes are reliably clean. “As those airplanes flow forward down the line, we think it’s going to take some time for the new quality assurance inspection processes to start early enough so that airplanes will flow that are FOD-free,” he said, according to Defense One. “It’s not the way we want to get airplanes into the Air Force, but it’s what we’re going to have to do in the meantime.”
  3. Yep. I did this a few years ago but it seemed to lose interest. Glad you're starting one. "in"
  4. Curious to hear what the thoughts are on that. Especially from the 17 guys.
  5. “ “It’s truly a magnificent fart once it’s in the air”
  6. What command patch is that they have? USAFE...duh Also @ 2:55, 3 jets in view
  7. Pros https://youtu.be/0CbWkfCA9tc
  8. http:// Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app
  9. RAAF C-17 having fun in Brisbane https://youtu.be/cYkL5C-xJ5U
  10. WW did that to a BUFF once upon a time: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10314/the-time-a-f-4g-wild-weasels-anti-radiation-missile-blew-apart-a-b-52s-tail
  11. The X is for EXTREME!!! https://www.defenseone.com/business/2018/07/boeing-pitching-new-f-15-using-its-super-hornet-game-plan/149839/ Boeing is quietly pitching the U.S. Air Force a new F-15 fighter jet using the same business strategy that convinced the Trump administration to buy more Super Hornet warplanes for the Navy. Dubbed the F-15X, the new variant of the venerable jet offers more modern flight controls, cockpit displays, and radar, according to military and industry sources with knowledge of the plan. The plane would also pack a lot of firepower, carrying more than two dozen air-to-air missiles, the most of any U.S. Air Force aircraft. Boeing officials declined to explicitly confirm their efforts to sell the F-15X, except perhaps obliquely: “We see the marketplace expanding internationally and it’s creating opportunities then to go back and talk to the U.S. Air Force about what might be future upgrades or even potentially future acquisitions of the F-15 aircraft,” Gene Cunningham, vice president of global sales of Defense, Space & Security, said Friday at the Royal International Air Tattoo in England. The Air Force has not purchased new F-15s since placing a 2001 order for five F-15E Strike Eagles, a two-seat version that can bomb ground targets and shoot down other aircraft. The original F-15 first flew in 1972, and many of the Air Force’s current air-to-air Eagles entered service in the 1980s. Many of them are older than the pilots who fly them. Unlike its successful Super Hornet pitch to the Trump administration last year, the F-15 pitch has not made its way to White House, according to sources with knowledge of the project. When Trump visited a Boeing commercial factory in South Carolina in February 2017, reporters traveling with the President spotted then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus with a Boeing white paper that compared an advanced version of the Super Hornetto the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter made by rival Lockheed Martin. Air Force leaders say they are currently evaluating their mix of aircraft. “We have a new National Defense Strategy and the Air Force is working through the process of determining what Air Force is needed to meet that new National Defense Strategy and how do you represent that to the world, Gen. James “Mike” Holmes, the head of Air Combat Command, said June 28 at a Defense Writers Group breakfast in Washington. Among the options being considered are new versions of F-15s and F-16s, according to one Air Force observer. American allies Israel, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and South Korea fly tailored versions of the F-15. The newest member of the Eagle club is Qatar, which ordered 36 aircraft last year and has an option for 36 more. Boeing is also pitching the F-15 to Germany, which wants to replace its Tornado jets. Boeing’s Cunningham, said the firm is also offering upgrades to existing F-15s with technology used in the newer ally aircraft. The F-15 is considered a fourth-generation plane, one that does not have a stealth design, which helps it evade enemy missiles. For more than a decade, Air Force leaders have long pressed for buying only stealthy fighter and bomber aircraft. Buying new F-15s would reverse that. “This is the most traction I’ve ever seen legacy four [generation aircraft] get in the Air Force,” the Air Force observer said. The F-15 was supposed to be replaced the by the stealthy F-22 Raptor — considered the top air-to-air combat fighter. Despite objections from top Air Force generals, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered an end to F-22 production in 2009. The final jet came off of Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, Georgia, production line in 2012. In all, the Air Force purchased 187 Raptors, far less than the more than 750 originally planned. At the time, Gates opted to invest in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a multi-role fighter, which can shoot down planes and attack targets on the ground with its array of advanced sensors, radar and sensors. Foreign versions of the F-15 have received newer technology not around when the American planes were built. Over the years, U.S.F-15s have received upgrades to their radars and cockpits, but the Air Force recently canceled an effort to add electronic jammers to its older F-15Cs. Some Air Force observers said that indicates the service might retire the plane sooner than planned. Boeing has long pitched new versions of the Strike Eagle to the Air Force and international customers. In 2010, the firm pitched the Silent Eagle — an F-15 with special coating and canted vertical tails — that executives said could better evade enemy detection. In 2015, it pitched an upgrade to the F-15C — the aerial combat version — that would allow it to carry 16 air-to-air missiles. At times, Boeing has argued that upgraded versions of their planes could come close to matching the advanced stealth, sensors and electronic warfare capabilities of the F-35 at a fraction of the cost. Now the savings might not be as much as the price tag of the Air Force F-35 has been dropping annually. The Pentagon on Sunday announced it has a handshake agreement with Lockheed Martin for a new batch of 141 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters. The Air Force version of the plane cost about $89 million per copy, according to a Reuters. An Air Force source noted that buying new F-15s now would not be seen as competing with the F-35 since the the Joint Strike Fighter has never been considered a replacement for the F-15.
  12. Sheeeeeeit. Been awhile since I was in a B-1, no space for the OSO to sit somewhere else? I understand it was an IFE at the time, but man, not knowing if that thing was gonna fire or not. I'd rather take my chances climbing out of a hole made by another seat.
  13. b52gator

    Latest Movies

    Looks like it'll be a good one
  • Create New...