scoobs Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Anybody know what the lifestyle is like for the KC-10?I know there probably gone a lot just like everybody else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AirGuardian Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 High value low density asset. Have seen them in the garden spots and bad spots when I'm tripping it, overall from an outsiders viewpoint: Best of the tankers, or at the bare minimums you get a great type rating... Saw a couple at Las Vegas a couple of weeks ago and a few at Hawaii last weekend. But I'm sure they're in other "tight spots" as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mambo Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 There's a reason their called the "Gucci Boys". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobs Posted November 3, 2004 Author Share Posted November 3, 2004 I heard that changed.Not so "Gucci" anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herk Mafia Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 I think "Gucci" is the call sign the KC-10 drivers at McGuire use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IGB Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Gucci is Travis - Fat Boys are McGuire for 1st assignment MWS 10 guys. The 10 is a great jet. Like AG says, we're at the best and worst locations (relatively speaking). I really think we have the best deal going as far as deployments in AMC. We're not gone all the time like a Barney, nor broke like a Fred, or too austere like a Herc. What you don't know in UPT is about SRT's and the like. I remember asking all the same questions about TDYs and Deployments. We in the 10 know with pretty good certainty the date (and even time) we will be getting home. C-5’s and 17’s know where their first leg is taking them and that they hope in 2 weeks time they will be RTB’ing. In the 10, it’s true as an A/C you get your DC-10 type rating which is handy, from what I hear, over at the Bigs (esp. FedEx). You will do tanker work (the only thing a 135 will do), receiver work, then moving the same stuff that the rest of the C’s do. We just don’t do air drop or low levels. The best part is that your legs are really freaking long so that you can get where you need to go without the fuel stops. It’s a commercial airliner so the creature comforts built for the 6-figure airline pilots are still there. No Dave Clarks necessary. The 10 is a better platform because we are, like I said before, receiver pilots also. We know how not to screw the guy behind you (Insert ACC STS). Travel is good. The hours can come fast. Your MR ride is required to be overseas! There is something kinda cool about turning onto a fighter flight in a tanker rendezvous and then you leading them all the way across the pond and into the fight (after some drunk time in Seville). Anymore questions PM me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pinko Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 IGB- how long is a typical deployment? Whats the worst thing about the 10 lifestyle? How long is upgrade time (typically)? Do you do around the world trips like the 17? How much domestic flying does the 10 do? Whats it like as a fresh-out-of-UPT 1st Lt? thanks in advance cheers- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 How are the drops for KC-10s? Pretty few and far between because of the limited number of airframes in the inventory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter14 Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 The 10 is a better platform because we are, like I said before, receiver pilots also. We know how not to screw the guy behind you (Insert ACC STS).That's kind of a sweeping generalization. My ANG KC-135 unit has former BUFF, E-3, F-111, FB-111, RC-135, Eagle, Viper etc. etc. pilots, most with over 3500 hours. Also, the new AMC initiative is taking guys I know from the C-5 and -141 world and putting them into the KC-135, and vice-versa. Granted, you all have receiver experience, but to call yourself a "better platform" because of it is a little much, IMHO. Bottom line: when you pull up behind a KC-135, you don't need to worry about getting screwed, we know what we are doing, too... and we can't get Force Extended! [ 23. November 2004, 22:41: Message edited by: PAB ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 135IBO Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 Originally posted by IGB: You will do tanker work (the only thing a 135 will do), receiver work, then moving the same stuff that the rest of the C’s do. I am a long time lurker of the site and had to jump in on this one. We in the -135 world do more than just fly 6 hour orbits, consolidate into the 10 and RTB so they can fly a nice 10 hour mission. We are very heavy into the A/E mission, bringing the injured home. We are hauling troops all over the world because the C's are over tasked. Granted, we can not haul as much cargo, but lately we are doing our fair share of out and backs with a box or two. We have our R/T models that can play receiver if needed. We sit alert for the SIOP mission, we run the START lines, Noble Eagle missions. The boom operators actually "fly" the boom instead of a fly by wire computer doing it for them. The pilots land with throttles, and the FE is... Oh wait, we do not need one, we have a co-pilot that does that job plus can do more than just putting up the gear. Did I mention we can dump into a KC-10 and RTB? We no longer wear David Clarks (Gone Bose) and to top it all off, we have fun and love being the workhorse of the tanker fleet. Oh ya, and we can consolidate in to a -10 and RTB before the beer tent closes up. One other thing. In my 1500 plus hours, I have yet to have been told that we screwed any one behind the boom... [ 27. November 2004, 05:25: Message edited by: 135IBO ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 135IBO Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 And for some numbers per the last GAO report Total in the fleet.. 59 KC-10 543 KC-135 aircraft KC-10 MC Rate (Operation OIF/OEF): 81.2% KC-135 MC Rate (Operation OIF/OEF): 91.6% And our tails are 40+ years old Oh by the way, we can consolidate into the -10 and RTB. [ 27. November 2004, 05:15: Message edited by: 135IBO ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest C5Heavy Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 I agree with PAB on the AMC initiatives. PAB I think Col Sears flew F-111 back in the days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tentoad Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 I am a former (SAC) KC-135 guy and have been in the KC-10 for 12 years (Active and Reserve) 1. Consolidation into the -10 sucks. 2. Gucci applies to the -10 before the "Winter of Tears" 1994 when the 3 original bases BRAC'd into the current 2. Travis and McGuire. Gucci is long dead... 3. Deployments range from a few weeks to months. Funny, I came to the -10 to stop getting deployed to the desert. Up to 19 desert deployments now... PS: I only count 30 days or more as a deployment. 4. Better platform. If I need gas I dont care who gives it to me. Enough of that. 5. Both AD and AFRES are overmanned. Hence, few drops... 6. AE is coming to the -10. 7. Consolidation into the -10 sucks. Tentoad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest svrider03 Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 As a KC-10 E, it's much better than the other tanker, but any shred of Gucci left the McGoo fleet when that first plane hit the tower..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest svrider03 Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 hey 135IBO, yes, we know you dump gas into the 10, and RTB!! It's nothing new for us.....if there's another tanker in the same hemi-sphere, our Driver's want to sniff it's *ss.... And yes Fly by Wire is nice.....I also never refuel with cold feet!! thanks!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JS Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 What does consolidation into a -10 mean? Are the Bose headsets the Britney Spears ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tentoad Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 JS You ask a good question. Normally all this happens over an AOR (place of war). Tankers can drag fighters (chicks) to/from an area or simply go there and orbit. Consolidation occurs when one or more tankers offloads their extra fuel into a receiver capable tanker. In almost every case the KC-10 is doing the receiving. The benefit to this is that one tanker will burn less fuel than 4 tankers and increase availible offload. The only flaw is the crew getting the gas is now extended to a time that is yet to be determined. Stories of repeat consolidations extending crews to 16-18 hours are normal. Picture getting launched off alert, sched for an 8 hour sortie, and then flying 18 hours. After a while you run out of food and water, worst of all you run out of caffeine!!! It is actually an excellent way to increase fuel in a location and the -10 is the best one to do this as it can do drogue and boom refueling on the same sortie. A -135 sortie can only get a little longer, but is usually shorter than planned. This makes maintenance (who quoted reliability rates?) easier as the jets are on the ground longer. A KC-10 sortie that has its sortie time doubled... The worst is when you are stationed at some shithole and some tanker guy who is at a nice place who wants his sortie to become combat time is out there begging to come to you and give you his excess gas. :) Tentoad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest svrider03 Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Tentoad, Have we flown O1 sorties together? Excellent description of the bleeding McGoo crews suffered. BTW, I'm leaving today for the AOR, can we access BaseOps.net out there? Thanks, FAT Boom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bergman Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Anyone know the background of the KC-10 buy back in the 70's? We were discussing it over beers the other night and couldn't come up with the complete story. IIRC it was the AF bailing out McDonnel DOuglas by buying airplanes already on the production line that weren't sold? Lastly, rather than reinvent the wheel with the KC-767, why not just by a shitload of DC-10s and/or MD-11s (or buy new ones for that matter) since the ground work has already been done. I understand that there is a # of airframes vs. total offload argument, plus the landing weights, ramp space requirements, and special on/offload capes needed for the -10, among other problems. Interested to hear everyone's comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tentoad Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 FATBoom: It wouldnt surprise me is we have deployed together. I was a 32nd guy who came up from SJAFB. Bergman: The KC-10 was partially bought to help out Mc-D. However the real push was to build a plane that could deploy a fighter wing quickly and on the cheap. 70's funding sucked. KC-135R models werent around then so it took a lot of anemic A model -135's to move a few fighters. So along comes to KC-10. Hauls more cargo than a C-17. Offloads a ton of gas and can be refueled itself. A brave concept. If it was a welfare case they wouldnt have done such a great job building the boom it has. Sadly, the days of the DC-10/MD-11 are past. Boeing wont tool back up for it. Anyway, a tanker that holds all your gas is like putting your eggs in one basket. Better to have more booms over the theatre than one -10 sometimes as a whole strike package will take forever to refuel due to boom cycle time (how fast receivers take gas). The 767 was an excellent platform to start from. Ironic, the USAF PC crowd shuns Curt Lemay but the continue to fly the airplanes he bought. Lemay could pick them!!! Whatever we buy we need to actually purchase them with all the stuff we need to get deep into the 21st century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyPilot Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Can anyone tell me the differences between Travis and McGuire as far as AD TDYs (other than going to the sandbox...) are concerned? Example: Travis goes west and McGuire goes east? Or does it really not matter? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Not a whole lot of difference - Travis comes east about as often as McGuire goes west. The deployed crews are roughly an even mix, and the deployed staff alternates between T and M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
contraildash Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) I like McGuire's style... note: Lajes can be 'sporty' Edited September 20, 2010 by contraildash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crew Report Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 I like McGuire's style... note: Lajes can be 'sporty' So can Mildenhall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
contraildash Posted September 21, 2010 Share Posted September 21, 2010 So can Mildenhall. And off the right wing you can see the approach lighting system........ 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