Sua Sponte Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_breaker Posted October 5, 2022 Share Posted October 5, 2022 Anybody know what's going on at McGuire? Seeing memes about them not having any tankers, some drama between AD/guard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted October 6, 2022 Share Posted October 6, 2022 RUMINT, guard is gonna loose their 135s and take the 46s away from he reserve squadrons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted October 6, 2022 Share Posted October 6, 2022 Reserve squadrons will shutter and the base will become AD/ANG associate like Pease.Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_breaker Posted October 6, 2022 Share Posted October 6, 2022 19 hours ago, ThreeHoler said: Reserve squadrons will shutter and the base will become AD/ANG associate like Pease. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app As in McGuire and Pease are both going to be TFI assignments for AD types? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted October 7, 2022 Share Posted October 7, 2022 There is an AD sq and an ANG sq at Pease now. But I might be confused.Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runr6730 Posted October 7, 2022 Share Posted October 7, 2022 10 hours ago, ThreeHoler said: There is an AD sq and an ANG sq at Pease now. But I might be confused. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app Correct. Currently there are active associate units at both Pease and Seymour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted October 8, 2022 Share Posted October 8, 2022 On 10/6/2022 at 7:01 PM, ThreeHoler said: There is an AD sq and an ANG sq at Pease now. But I might be confused. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app There’s one at SJ as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted October 8, 2022 Share Posted October 8, 2022 (edited) On 10/5/2022 at 10:08 PM, ThreeHoler said: Reserve squadrons will shutter and the base will become AD/ANG associate like Pease. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app What’s happening with the AFRC units personnel who just went through BTX/PTX? Edited October 8, 2022 by Sua Sponte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter14 Posted October 9, 2022 Share Posted October 9, 2022 Reserve squadrons will shutter and the base will become AD/ANG associate like Pease.Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile appIt’ll be more like Fairchild or McConnell where the AD owns the iron and the ARC wing associates with them but yes it would be an association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoker Posted October 9, 2022 Share Posted October 9, 2022 (edited) 13 hours ago, Sua Sponte said: What’s happening with the AFRC units personnel who just went through BTX/PTX? Remember that scene from Casino where they drive Joe Pesci out to the cornfield? Edited October 9, 2022 by Stoker 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestik Møøse Posted October 9, 2022 Share Posted October 9, 2022 13 hours ago, Stoker said: Remember that scene from Casino where they drive Joe Pesci out to the cornfield? Don’t forget that scene from Goodfellas where they drive Joe Pesci to his initiation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skybert Posted October 11, 2022 Share Posted October 11, 2022 Dumb question. What are the differences between the KC-46 and the KC-767? I haven’t heard any bad things about the ‘67 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 On 10/8/2022 at 3:42 PM, Sua Sponte said: What’s happening with the AFRC units personnel who just went through BTX/PTX? They don't know. Some are looking into different units. On 10/10/2022 at 7:27 PM, skybert said: Dumb question. What are the differences between the KC-46 and the KC-767? I haven’t heard any bad things about the ‘67 All of the airframes have the passenger windows on them just covered up, the boom is more like the KC-135 boom (KC-46 boom is more like the KC-10). Some of the Japanese pilots i've talked to say that they can't offload as much fuel as the 46 for weight reasons I think. The integrated mission systems on the 46 are another difference. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AC&W Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 On 10/11/2022 at 2:27 AM, skybert said: I haven’t heard any bad things about the ‘67 Partner Nations (PN) operating the -767 don't have extensive inventory of attack, strategic, and tactical assets the U.S. operates. PNs make due with what they have, meanwhile the USAF via bureaucracy, ensures their tankers are fully interoperable with the entire DoD fleet before praising their new tanker. Its the tradeoff of efficiency vs. resiliency. Or, it is classic government logic, let's not declare our new tanker asset IOC until it is technically compatible with the asset we want to retire (i.e. A-10). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger41 Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 1 hour ago, AC&W said: Partner Nations (PN) operating the -767 don't have extensive inventory of attack, strategic, and tactical assets the U.S. operates. PNs make due with what they have, meanwhile the USAF via bureaucracy, ensures their tankers are fully interoperable with the entire DoD fleet before praising their new tanker. Its the tradeoff of efficiency vs. resiliency. Or, it is classic government logic, let's not declare our new tanker asset IOC until it is technically compatible with the asset we want to retire (i.e. A-10). I was curious about that. How could that be the case with the A-10? Isn’t the receptacle standardized (STS) across the fleet? Therefore if it works on a F-16 or B-1, why wouldn’t it work on A-10? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 I was curious about that. How could that be the case with the A-10? Isn’t the receptacle standardized (STS) across the fleet? Therefore if it works on a F-16 or B-1, why wouldn’t it work on A-10?More to do with the low speed aircraft/boom performance envelope there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 Boom envelope is fine. Boeing ed up a perfectly good, even if archaic, Douglas design and the boom is too stiff (doesn’t extend or retract easily which makes it hard for the A-10 to push in).Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 6 hours ago, Orbit said: They don't know. Some are looking into different units. All of the airframes have the passenger windows on them just covered up, the boom is more like the KC-135 boom (KC-46 boom is more like the KC-10). Some of the Japanese pilots i've talked to say that they can't offload as much fuel as the 46 for weight reasons I think. The integrated mission systems on the 46 are another difference. The 767 carries one more pallet (19) than a -46, more pax (around 200 I think), and doesn't have the built in AE capability. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PeggyDriver46 Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 14 hours ago, SurelySerious said: More to do with the low speed aircraft/boom performance envelope there. That's not true. It has to do with the boom stiffness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 That's not true. It has to do with the boom stiffness. And the ability of one aircraft to perform enough to be compatible? Seems like it’s still a performance envelope problem. Also that boom isn’t stiff it’s on a ing ratchet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 I’d be more concerned about the fact that the W&B software can’t use the full CG envelope so the jet basically can’t carry cargo. RIP big sexy and your 175K cargo capacity!Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 I’d be more concerned about the fact that the W&B software can’t use the full CG envelope so the jet basically can’t carry cargo. RIP big sexy and your 175K cargo capacity!Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile appSounds like the AF didn’t pay enough money to unlock the WB software. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff_T Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AC&W Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 6 hours ago, SurelySerious said: Sounds like the AF didn’t pay enough money to unlock the WB software. They paid for the software, they failed to properly articulate the requirement, and/or perform quality control on the product delivered. #operatorsinacquisition 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now