KC-135 turns 59

Status
Not open for further replies.
That has been one great workhorse of an aircraft. I think they still maintain them at the Oklahoma Air Logistics Center. I'd be real surprised if they have any original parts on them by now.

This plane led directly to the dominance of the 707 in the early jet age, something the European governments still grouse about when we complain that they directly subsidize Airbus.
 
With a FNG like a fresh co-pilot on the controls, the boomer would nudge the boom in some amounts over time until a max azmuth. During this the A/C would also require corresponding trim adjustments that new guy at the controls would input. At a point, the boomer would suddenly dump over to the other max excursion =surprise/what's going on. Of course, the rest of the crew knew and the co-pilot's pretty much had to have heard this was coming, but not when. These were also used a lot as transports. The earlier models were most always running darn near max just to stay in the air. Kinda bothered me have so little margin. A good airplane and when re-powered later were probably very good.
 
Hadn't thought about a "fang" in a long time. LOL Thanks for that. As to engine performance I recall hearing the guys talk about the ice fog that water injection left hanging in the air at Eielson or Shemya after takeoff. They waited way too long to upgrade to the "R" versions.
 
F...NewGuy-yup, there was also F...AirNationalGuard. A different time. The Reserves and Guard were used and treated poorly in those days.
 
From 1966 through 1968 I was stationed at Wurtsmith AFB and filled a lot of the KC135A models. 191000 pounds of fuel on an alert load. They had demineralized water to inject on take-off to increase thrust, and they needed it! The B52H models there took over 300000 pounds of fuel. The Buffs on alert carried nukes and AGAM's with nukes. Altogether a very serious place during the cold war.
 
I had always understood that the early KC 135's, at least, were not quite a 707 (body diameter, etc.) meaning it was hard to swap junk yard parts.
 
Originally Posted By: bmwjohn
I had always understood that the early KC 135's, at least, were not quite a 707 (body diameter, etc.) meaning it was hard to swap junk yard parts.


You're right, they weren't exactly the same. The KC135 grew out of the initial development, but the research and development cost on the 707 had been largely paid for by Uncle Sugar on the tanker program. Boeing had to risk very heavily as well. They often joke out there that each time they develop a brand new airplane they "bet the company" due to the costs involved. What the saying means is that they can't make a mistake or it will take the company down.
 
I keep this picture of Tex Johnson barrow rolling the Dash 80 on my wall to remind me what a great pilot is...

I was a Sac trained killer Crew Chief on a Strato-Bladder 81-88...
 
Last edited:
And, if I could add, the European complaint doesn't just involve like for like development. It also involves the fact that even similar or remotely similar aircraft production reduces the overhead cost per aircraft thereby giving the US an "unfair advantage".

Isn't that lovely? We spend tons on defense, in this case aircraft, to defend them as well as us and then they sue in the WTO feeling that it's OK for them to cut our throats in the marketplace by buying business with subsidies or by "buying" business.

It's a strange world.
 
Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
I keep this picture of Tex Johnson barrow rolling the Dash 80 on my wall to remind me what a great pilot is...

I was a Sac trained killer Crew Chief on a Strato-Bladder 81-88...


I love that story. What a great bunch of characters came out of that generation.
 
Very long, very twisted political story behind that one. Boeing still having some issues but workable. I personally thought the triple 7 would've made more sense long term. It never made sense to me that we might buy Airbus tankers (via Northrop) but I'm a chauvinist when it comes to strategic things like that. I don't have any info relative to how well the KC-10's have been in service but no news is probably good news. Anybody?
 
Here's a snapshot of where the program is and some of the program structural "concerns". They're currently reworking the wiring again as well. Like any major project there is no end to the challenges. The inclusion of the picture is just FYI for familiarization.

kc46a-schematic.jpg


http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense...elays/71473606/

This lower link is to a Sen. John McCain letter of concern to Sec. Carter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

dave1251
  • Locked
Exxon Mobil
Replies
19
Views
13K
MolaKule
A
  • Locked
Oil is killing our cars ?
Replies
10
Views
4K
Triple_Se7en
MolaKule
  • Locked
Chevron/Unocal Deal
Replies
3
Views
997
haley10
J
  • Locked
A Bronx Curbside Whisper: 'Hey, Need a Tuneup?'
Replies
9
Views
2K
Terry
Back
Top