All Activity

Other air forces are already using it, cool story. That has nothing to do with how long it will take to get this platform approved for use with every fighter in our inventory. AFSOC may be able to get shit fielded in 3 years but us peasants in the CAF can barely get software changes in that timeframe so excuse me if I have doubts on your timeline. The E-7 is a good illustration of my point that "proven" platforms in use by our allies still take many years to become operational in our services. That's a critique on us not Embraer. I've sat through too many shameless pitches from dudes who wear LM, Northrop, Boeing, RTX, etc. polos and who were once "bros" to believe the company brochure. Phrases like "most of the risk is gone" are par for the course. That's a critique on dudes I know that were either ignorant or blatant sellouts. Don't take it personally. I don't know a single line pilot that isn't on board for trying something different when it comes to better capes/ acquisitions. The bobs who won't be going down range and are banking on a board spot at a big 3 are the ones that need convincing. Also, maybe vets should stop helping these companies oversell and under deliver...

Probably at least a coffee. No tip though :)

I mean, if I was still sitting reserve in a crash pad in Queens... nah. After Federal/NYS/NYC taxes, I'd make enough for a Starbucks tip. Not the drink, just the tip.

I had to see it for myself. Its on the signup site still :) https://www.nyc.gov/assets/dsny/forms/snow-laborer-registration

Yeah, RVS sucks. They could have, should have fielded their improvement by now, but that is our wonderful Prime and Acquisition efficiency on display. Existing RVS is good enough for current operations. The -46 is a mess, so many lost opportunities on what could have been, but over 100 have been produced and production is still active. The Airbus tanker is fielding an autonomous boom AAR capability for Singapore, the KC-390 is awesome. There was a time when, "Fly Boeing Tankers" was a cool slogan, unfortunately the -46 has tarnished that a bit.

And RVS?

In the interest of facts, not championing the KC-46. Deliveries were briefly halted in early 2025, but they have resumed and delivered at least 10 since the stopage.

Not that is matters, but I like the idea of having a boom equipped 390, it's a cool aircraft. Realistically, I just don't see it happening. I believe it's been mentioned that the 390 could be modified to carry more fuel. Correct me if I'm wrong but the currently fieldeid 390 can carry a maximum of 79,090 lbs of fuel (utilizing roll-on tanks in the cargo compartment). 79K is a capability, but still fairly short of our current big wing tankers. What fuel load was it running in war games? If it was more than 80K than not sure the results were realistic.

The irony...

The project was pitched to USAF (by me and a few others), three years ago. At that point the timelines were completely doable for the China fight. Cool story except the jet is ALREADY doing those things...at least with the variable speed drogue. (Brazilian Air Force (since 2019), Portuguese Air Force (2023), and Hungarian Air Force (2024). It was designed to refuel Helos which it has been doing since 2014, the variable speed drogue was certified two years ago, I think they started with F-5's. Regardless, it is now certified for a bunch of aircraft...Gripen completed a few months ago. The Northrop Boom is TRL 7 so mot of the risk is gone. It is already at scale and in service with the Brazilian Air Force (since 2019), Portuguese Air Force (2023), and Hungarian Air Force (2024). They make one per month, have the organic capability to make two per month. With investment, 10 per month...being fully digital means they are already postured for rapid production. Also, funny you mention the parts...Collins Avionics, the engines are the International Aero Engines (IAE) V2500-E5 right off the Airbus 320 CEO...a purposeful decision. Also, kind of funny you mention timelines, Boeing was late delivering KC-46's and now deliveries are stopped because of major cracks. The RVS is broken and they openly admit they won't have a fix until 2027. This and the fool me once meme are the reasons we are trapped in our own dogma. ZERO vision and willingness to try something different...now the tanker choads can just chew their cude...you got what you deserved...our at least what your masters think you deserved. I've discussed it before but saw the same thing with the Wedgetail (which is better than a 60 year old E-3, but us still a flying tube of hot garbage). When we offered a far superior option with a brand new but proven radar, imported existing mission and data management systems from current ISR platforms with MILLIONS of flight hours and mounted on a Bombardier bizjet that could part up at FL 510...greatly changing the physics of the AMB world. We submitted HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of pages of tech data including detailed engineering reports from actual flights. As I recall there were 480 pages just on the certification of the "shapes" that would house the radar and other toys alone. We submitted the entire package and USAF responded ONE HOUR later - "not technically feasible." I am sure they did a detailed analysis of all the engineering and documentation in that hour. The NEXT DAY the gave Boeing a Sole-Source for E-7.

Are you at Creech?

You were correct my friend. I was one of the 18 alternates and my commander told me 2 days ago I got an offer to go to Laughlin RNLTD March. Yes or no with zero flexibility, of course I said yes. Insanity. Current RPA, 94 pilot, 85 PCSM, 1/2 Sq, unknown wing, LOR from my Sq commander of 2 years which was very personal, one deployment, and 3 quarterly awards. For my rated peers I know leadership is difficult for us to obtain and demonstrate, especially us LTs, but we can get a lot of it from exercises and deployments. Volunteer for everything. Also, the board said the scheduler loaded my dates in, don’t know what that means as I don’t have anything on my CDB but I think we are very close.

Looks like it was shot down

This. There are all of these great platforms, tech, new con ops but we just talk, kick the tires, say that’s cool and do the square root of shit differently than we’ve done for the past 30 years

The Straits TimesMyitkyina Airport in Myanmar attacked by drone, MNA passe...The aircraft’s nose, mid-body and tail lights suffered damage. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.

Well in any case for those of us still waiting this SHOULD be the week, else we're finally justified in spaming AFPC regarding assignments lol.

The biggest drawback is that this jet is 15 years, minimum, too late to the party if the timeline for us to use it in INDOPACOM is to be believed. I'm sure all those capes you listed are possible, and eventually that jet might actually be able to do all of them. At some point it might actually be manufactured rapidly, at scale, and with enough parts required to sustain it. The bros that went to work for Lockheed, Boeing, or X consulting company after the AF came to the squadrons and pitched the same BS for jets like the F-35, F-15EX, and T-7 etc.

Northrop already has a flying wing boom. Huh? Same offload as a KC-135 Multi-speed range drogue for Helo/TiltRotor/Jet AR can refuel two aircraft at same time AND still has a boom for USAF AR. Operates of 3,000' strips. In war games run it COMPLETELY changed the dynamic of the fight. a. More gas on station for same number of platforms because it can operate forward and shuttle gas to the IP faster. b. 198 airfields in INDOPCOM forward that can handle big-wing tankers. 1,000 4,000 asphalt/dirt approved in same. You are 180 out my friend. USAF is trapped in a Stockholm syndrome of ideology. This biggest shortfall of this platform is we would get 2.5 for 1 and it would require more pilots. I spent a year on this project including walking the fully digital production line in Brazil...zero paper used to make this plane, completely state of the art.

Boeing and Airbus both probably don't want Embraer to manufacture a boom. Teaming with Northrop is an interesting development. I'm still not convinced the USAF would entertain the 390, jucie just not worth the squeeze (complex with limited offload). If money and manpower were not a factor the 390 would be a neat addition. A boom 390 could be relevant to countries with smaller geography and inventories, and who could maximize the efficiency of reconfiguring the aircraft between boom and cargo; Portugal, Poland, Argentina, Chile, Greece, Romania are few that come to mind.

Airbus has a boom, cut Boeing out of the equation

A book was in development for the KC-390. Boeing is predatory and trying to block all efforts to engineer a new boom. Buying up all the surplus booms, even in airparks. Putting a boom on the 390 changes the tanker calculus and Boeing can't have that.

News https://theaviationist.com/2026/02/20/embraer-northrop-grumman-kc-390-tanker-boom/

Hey everyone, please take what I’m about to say with the smallest piece of a grain of salt. I have a buddy who got picked up for officer training school and is there right now and graduates in a few weeks. When he got picked up, he got selected for RPA even though his number one was manned Pilot. He sent me a message this morning and said that he was just offered a Pilot slot and he took it in ots. I’ve heard of something happening like this before a few years ago, but it was super rare. I asked him how this happened and that I was super happy for him and he said that him and nine other people were pulled into a room with the commandant and the commandant informed them that the Air Force needs 150 more pilots and that he’s giving them the opportunity to switch from the job that they currently have to Pilot. With that being said, I don’t know that it would affect any alternates that may have been selected for this board, but if the Air Force exhausts all of its pipelines for training that could be an opportunity for more people to get picked up if they were an alternate and that’s just my assumption. This is not based on anything official.