That's a good looking airplane. Pegasus. Dumb name tho.

KC-46 Gas Passer has a nice ring to it...

 

Stratotanker II would have been fine but if we wanted a mythological nickname Mercury would have been better

 

There should be a binding congressional resolution to prevent any service from naming a plane "Something II". 

Stratotanker II would have been fine but if we wanted a mythological nickname Mercury would have been better

 

Or maybe Icarus

but but but PeGASus has the word gas in it!

I'm pretty sure Mercury has been taken by the Navy E-6B Tacamo.   

Edited August 18, 201510 yr by Vito

I'm pretty sure Mercury has been taken by the Navy E-6B Tacamo.   

You are correct good sir so that one is taken

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doesn't matter, it will through time be known by a unofficial nickname i.e. Lawn Dart, Mud Hen, Hog, Fred, Barney, etc. In my world we just call them 135's or when A models flew Steamjets. Recievers will just call them Mogas ,Shell, or Texaco.   

Recievers will just call them Mogas ,Shell, or Texaco.   

Nah, they'll probably just call them late to the IP.

I'm pretty sure Mercury has been taken by the Navy E-6B Tacamo.   

And Pegasus was taken by the Navy T-44 King Air.

Nah, they'll probably just call them late to the IP.

Said very few ever.

Anybody know what KC-46 deployments are projected to be like? They are replacing KC-10's in some squadrons and KC-135's in other squadrons. My understanding is that KC-10 deployments are usually 60 days while KC-135 are 90 or so - would the KC-46 be one of those or somewhere in between? 

2 hours ago, bb17 said:

Anybody know what KC-46 deployments are projected to be like? They are replacing KC-10's in some squadrons and KC-135's in other squadrons. My understanding is that KC-10 deployments are usually 60 days while KC-135 are 90 or so - would the KC-46 be one of those or somewhere in between? 

Not an AMC planner, so my advice is worth what you paid for it. I suspect it'll be like Obamacare--gotta get it on the ramp before we see what it can really do; hence, difficult to predict with certainty how it'll be deployed. BLUF, I suspect the KC-46 will be a great airplane to go to, if you're either (1) single and like to be gone a ton, or (2) are married and don't like your family:

- Tanker requirements always exceed the AD's capacity to meet them, so KC-46 crews--just like KC-135 and -10 crews--will get tasked heavily to meet demand

- The KC-46 will have capabilities that the other two tanker airframes lack, which will make them all the more desirable by COCOMs

- Big Blue, wanting to show off the wisdom of buying the KC-46, will be all the more motivated to deploy it downrange/ employ it all over the world. Even if it didn't have many requirements, they'd come up with some

- Once we're in full-rate production, the aircraft will arrive faster than adequate numbers of aircrews can be produced to fly them. Big Blue, wanting to highlight the aircraft's capabilities, will accept the "necessity" to overtask the limited numbers of crews, in order to showcase their shiny new plane (see bullet above)

- KC-46 aircrew production will be further hobbled by the fact that Big Blue is prioritizing CAF pilot production, while MAF bubbas walk toward the light at the end of their SUPT commitments

- Better still, the ARC owns about half the tanker mission, but it's got its own manning woes; less help from ARC = heavier taskings for AD

Hopefully someone who flew C-17s in the late 90s/early 2000s will chime in; my impression is that community experienced much the same dynamic. I seem to remember my C-17 buddies just getting crushed during this timeframe.

If you're highly motivated/ambitious, want to fly a bunch and make your mark in a community that will surely still be defining itself, the KC-46 will be an awesome opportunity. You'll be part of developing tactics and writing regs to a degree that is nigh to impossible in older, more established communities. Best of luck, but go in with your eyes wide open.

TT

 

Awesome response - thanks! How exactly do AMC (TACC?) delegate work to ARC squadrons anyway? Do they just divvy up the necessary missions between various squadrons, and then the squadron figures out the manning of their missions internally, or something else? My experience in visiting tanker squadrons is that they basically just have a big white board with all the allocated missions for the month and people just write their name in based on their availability (I probably don't have the full picture of how things work). I wonder with such projected demand for the KC-46 if they would implement something else. 

Edited January 17, 20178 yr by bb17

7 hours ago, bb17 said:

Anybody know what KC-46 deployments are projected to be like? They are replacing KC-10's in some squadrons and KC-135's in other squadrons. My understanding is that KC-10 deployments are usually 60 days while KC-135 are 90 or so - would the KC-46 be one of those or somewhere in between? 

KC-135 deployments are 60-77 days.  If you deployed for 90, you'd time out on hours.

5 hours ago, bb17 said:

Awesome response - thanks! How exactly do AMC (TACC?) delegate work to ARC squadrons anyway?

I can only speak to the AD side, so someone else will have to chime in from the ARC perspective.

What Azimuth said checks; in my mind, no heavy driver (AD or ARC) should deploy for much more than 60 days: fly (with waiver) at a rate of 150 hrs/month for two months, then redeploy IOT remain within the 330 hrs/90 days FAA limit. Deploying heavy drivers--eventually to include KC-46s--for 90 or more days is just dumb, unless they're deploying to the CAOC or some other nonflying/min flying (Sq CC or DO) type billet. If you're at a deployed location and sq leadership isn't at least moderately concerned about managing crews' max flying hours, then there are too many folks deployed/not enough home station with mom & the kids.

TT

Curious if anyone has thoughts on if the KC-46 will be CHOP'd to AFCENT with it being AMCs newest, bright and shiny acquisition?

23 hours ago, Fuzz said:

Curious if anyone has thoughts on if the KC-46 will be CHOP'd to AFCENT with it being AMCs newest, bright and shiny acquisition?

Expect the KC-46 to CHOP.

https://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/1048659/jb-mcguire-dix-lakehurst-travis-afb-named-next-kc-46a-locations.aspx

Is the Air Force low-key saying it's replacing it's Travis/McGuire KC-10s with the 46, or are the 10s moving somewhere else? I thought they intended to keep the 10 around much longer?

https://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/1048659/jb-mcguire-dix-lakehurst-travis-afb-named-next-kc-46a-locations.aspx
Is the Air Force low-key saying it's replacing it's Travis/McGuire KC-10s with the 46, or are the 10s moving somewhere else? I thought they intended to keep the 10 around much longer?

-10s are gone starting 2019. Not low key at all.

I'd say McGuire transitions first and then Travis.

I might be getting ahead of myself, but what do you think would happen to a Reserve pilot fresh out of UPT/Altus who got to one of the -10 units, say six months or a year before the -46 actually arrived? Shouldn't be an issue me unless the -46 production is delayed (which would never happen, right?), I'm just curious. 

2 minutes ago, sforron said:

I might be getting ahead of myself, but what do you think would happen to a Reserve pilot fresh out of UPT/Altus who got to one of the -10 units, say six months or a year before the -46 actually arrived? Shouldn't be an issue me unless the -46 production is delayed (which would never happen, right?), I'm just curious. 

You go to Altus twice! 

3 hours ago, bb17 said:

You go to Altus twice! 

The KC-10 training is done at McGuire or Travis as far as I know, so no return trip to Altus. I just wonder if they'd bother to "waste" time training me on the -10, or if I'd end up stuck as the squadron gofer for a good chunk of time (more so than the average new guy).

Not that the answer changes anything, I'm just curious.

On 1/18/2017 at 10:27 PM, Right Seat Driver said:

Expect the KC-46 to CHOP.

Not if the leadership team in the Scott zip code has anything to say about it... the case for change is coming. How successful that push is remains to be seen.

(Old ways of doing thing die hard though, so they'll have to "show me" for me to believe it...)

Chuck

Edited February 2, 20178 yr by Chuck17