A330 Tanker loses the boom...

[uhhello]

5 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

The USAF would’ve had to redesigned the 767-200 empanage, which it couldn’t afford. Also, the aft part narrows and there’s two pallet positions that would’ve been lost. This has less to do either the cameras and more to do with the boom flight control system (FLCS) when the receiver is too far low and in while in contact. 

Perfect.  Yeah i'm not saying the boom pod setup had anything to do with the latest mishap, just more why the fuck they did it in the first place.  Thanks.

[Sua Sponte]

27 minutes ago, uhhello said:

Perfect.  Yeah i'm not saying the boom pod setup had anything to do with the latest mishap, just more why the fuck they did it in the first place.  Thanks.

Copy, no worries. This is the fifth time this scenario has happened that I know of. Japan had this scenario happen 1-2 times with their -46s as well.

Edited yesterday at 12:29 AM by Sua Sponte

[Arkbird]

3 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

Copy, no worries. This is the fifth time this scenario has happened that I know of. Japan had this scenario happen 1-2 times with their -46s as well.

Doesn't japan also have KC-767s? Do they also use cameras or are they the old reliable boom pod? 

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, Arkbird said:

Doesn't japan also have KC-767s? Do they also use cameras or are they the old reliable boom pod? 

Japan and Italy both got rid of their KC-767s and replaced them with the KC-46 (Italy calls the KC-46 the KC-767B for political reasons). The KC-767 used a window. The Dutch KDC-10s that Omega purchased used a camera system (dunno if Omega retrofitted the cameras with newer ones or used the window).

Edited yesterday at 04:41 AM by Sua Sponte