Can a KC-135 Tanker refuel itself?
Smack
probe also connected to the plane's own engines? And if so, what would
be the range of a KC-135 w/ a full load and without any other refueling
done? It would have to be a pretty incredible distance!
Thanks,
Scott
Khreriov
>probe also connected to the plane's own engines?
Yes. The KC-135 can burn from all of its fuel tanks courtesy of its various
manifolds. I don't know what the current range is, especially that of the
KC-135R.
K
Webmaster BW-Flyer.de
I thought only the KC-10 could these...
best wishes for 2001!
Ron Miller
: could a KC-135 refueld by another tanker?
: I thought only the KC-10 could these...
Yes.
I saw it done while I was a rider/passenger for a local flight
around Diego Garcia in 1981.
Our aircraft took on fuel from another KC-135. We then fueled
Navy aircraft using the boom-drogue jumper hose until the basket
broke off on one guy's probe.
Then we were finished for the day and had to dump fuel to reduce to
landing weight.
Ron
KenG
Some KC-135s could both take and pass gas. Not more than a dozen though,
most were ones that were modified at one time for a special purpose and
then returned to KC-135 configuration but retaining the fuel receptacle.
Most of the EC-135s were fully functional as tankers also, though not
used very often. Other C-135 variants could take gas but did not have
the boom associated with the tanker, these were mostly the RECON
RC-135s. I spent many hours flying as an inflight electronics Tech on
EC/RC/KC-135s from Offutt AFB.
Ken Gremillion
Eggroll135R
>I thought only the KC-10 could these...
There is a variant of the current KC-135 called a KC-135 R/T. These can be
re-fueled in-flight by another KC-135 or KC-10. Not alot of these R/T tankers
around though. The vast majority of the KC-135R fleet IS NOT capable of being
re-fueled in flight.
Eggroll135R
The range without refueling receivers en route is phenomenal. I know that
depending on winds at cruising altitude, a KC-135R can fly from a base in the
Midwestern United states to the Middle East without stopping. I think the Air
Force Fact Page lists the range at 11,500 miles. Don't know if that is
nautical or statute miles.
Tex Houston
are KC-135R models with the CFM56 engines and identically equipped KC-135T
models which can refuel SR-71 aircraft (the former KC-135Q). These are
together referred to as KC-135R/T. The Christine birds are indeed rare and
most, if not all, are EC and RC variants.
Regards,
Tex Houston
"Eggroll135R" <eggro...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001229144220...@ng-fv1.aol.com...
Eggroll135R
>are KC-135R models with the CFM56 engines and identically equipped KC-135T
>models which can refuel SR-71 aircraft (the former KC-135Q). These are
>together referred to as KC-135R/T. The Christine birds are indeed rare and
>most, if not all, are EC and RC variants.
>
>Regards,
>
>Tex Houston
>
Let me clarify. There used to be KC-135A models and KC-135Q's. When the
converstion process took place in the early 80's, KC-135A's became KC-135R's
and the KC-135Q's became KC-135T's. However, the aerial refuel-able KC-135
carries the designation KC-135RT. This disguishes it from the KC-135R or T,
which cannot be re-fueled in-flight. I have never worked on the RT version but
have helped load one while TDY. The plumbing for the A/R capability causes the
cockpit (control cabin for those politically correct <grin> ) to become quite
cramped if you are a tall person.
Bob Liberty
past with GPS and no nav :(
ole nav
"Eggroll135R" <eggro...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001229170843...@ng-cj1.aol.com...
Webmaster BW-Flyer.de
and thx bob for the pic in the binaries-group!
Bob Liberty <irg...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:v5936.210899$vc3.35...@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com...
David Lesher
>The range without refueling receivers en route is phenomenal. I know that
>depending on winds at cruising altitude, a KC-135R can fly from a base in the
>Midwestern United states to the Middle East without stopping. I think the Air
>Force Fact Page lists the range at 11,500 miles. Don't know if that is
>nautical or statute miles.
But when a friend had to hustle to the Middle East as a px in a
KC-11, they did midair refuelings twice. Why? Good excuse to stay
current, he was told. It was rather rough during same....
(FYI, the followup folks ended up in a NECAP, and they discovered
there's no baggage space on one of those.....)
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
B2431
>cockpit (control cabin for those politically correct <grin> ) to become
>quite
>cramped if you are a tall person
That's an understatement. I'm 6' 2" and used to work the Scopelight 135s at
Langley. There's a reason they referred to the padding around the plumbing as
inulation. It never did soften the blow.
Next question: how many people joined the waffle head club? I did in 1975.
Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retired
Steven P. McNicoll
"No User" <no....@anon.xg.nu> wrote in message
news:0784ba53ac430d42...@anon.xg.nu...
>
> IIRC, A long time ago, when KC-135's where (almost) new; SAC set
> the record for the longest distance flown on a single load of
> fuel with a KC-135. It was a north-south flight. That record
> is now now 2nd or 3rd longest. Voyager being the first,
> a B-52 flight being 2nd or 3rd.
>
> Anyone else recall? It was an offical record, by whomever keeps
> those records for International Aviation.
>
It wasn't an official record. The FAI record prior to Voyager was held by a
B-52H, the flight was 20,168.78 km from Okinawa to Madrid, Spain, on January
10-11, 1962. The previous record was held by a P2V, the flight was
18,081.99 km from Perth, Australia, to Columbus, Ohio, on September 29-
October 1, 1946.
Tex Houston
may have not been direct but was non-stop. Clyde Evely's flight from Kadena
to Spain still holds the class (not absolute) record.
Regards,
Tex Houston
"No User" <no....@anon.xg.nu> wrote in message
news:0784ba53ac430d42...@anon.xg.nu...
> IIRC, A long time ago, when KC-135's where (almost) new; SAC set
> the record for the longest distance flown on a single load of
> fuel with a KC-135. It was a north-south flight. That record
> is now now 2nd or 3rd longest. Voyager being the first,
> a B-52 flight being 2nd or 3rd.
>
> Anyone else recall? It was an offical record, by whomever keeps
> those records for International Aviation.
>
> Does the B-1 still hold the record for fastest non-stop around the
> world?
> More refuelings but several hours faster than the B-52 flights?
>
Eggroll135R
>may have not been direct but was non-stop. Clyde Evely's flight from Kadena
>to Spain still holds the class (not absolute) record.
>
>Regards,
>
>Tex Houston
>
I remember reading about that somewhere. I'd have to dig out my KC-135 In
Action book to be sure. Wasn't General LeMay on that flight?
Eggroll135R
>Langley. There's a reason they referred to the padding around the plumbing as
>inulation. It never did soften the blow.
That's why I'm glad I'm only 5'5" sometimes. However, closing the crew entry
door from the outside on a "light" tanker can sometimes be a challenge to me!!
>Next question: how many people joined the waffle head club? I did in 1975.
>
>Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retired
>
We have a local reg that states the crew entry door grate MUST be left down
whether there is someone upstairs or not. I personally like to leave it up
when no one is upstairs because I have run upstairs many a time to "cann" a
part at night on a "redball" and ran smack into the lowered grate. Still gets
your attention, even if there is a nice fluffly pad on the grate.
Eggroll
Steven P. McNicoll
"Tex Houston" <texho...@pcisys.net> wrote in message
news:t4s5tmf...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> I remember it as Buenos Aires, Argentina to Andrews AFB, Maryland.
>
That's about 8400 km, not even close to a record at the time.
Ron
My grandfather , in his B-52D days, and hooked up to a KC-135 for a refueling,
and everything went without a hitch. Which was good, since it turned it turned
out LeMay was on board the 135, although I am not sure what he was doing..maybe
just observing.
Ron Chambless
Pilot PA-34 Seneca II
"Strange Situations, Wild Occupations. Living my life like a song"
Tex Houston
Tex
"Eggroll135R" <eggro...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001230125801...@ng-fw1.aol.com...
Tex Houston
claim it was a direct flight. Record flights can wander all over the map as
long as destination to destination record is not claimed. The NAA or FAI
observer is the one who you have to satisfy as to route and whether it is
direct or closed course.
Regards,
Tex Houston
"Steven P. McNicoll" <ronca...@writeme.com> wrote in message
news:t4s93pn...@corp.supernews.com...
Ken Gremillion
E-4B. Almost all of our birds were IFR capable. The one KC-135 we had
was "Christine", (may be a reference to a former girlfriend). Since most
of ours were IFR it only took once to to impress indellibly in your mind
(and on your cranium) to duck when moving from the Pilot/Copilot seats
to the rear.
Ken Gremillion
refuel a KC-135 with no receptacle (inflight of course). RCs had boost
pump system that could pump fuel in the reverse direction back up the
boom and into the KC.
Tex Houston
reference is taken from the name of the first sex-change patient whose name
became Christine Jorgensen (do not remember what it was previously). All
birds with both receptacle and boom then became "Christines".
Regards,
Tex Houston
"Ken Gremillion" <Ke...@ec.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3A4E8060...@ec.rr.com...
Tex Houston
instance of a b-47 refueling Looking Glass and I, as a controller, launched
a B-52 to refuel a tanker.
Regards,
Tex Houston
"Ken Gremillion" <Ke...@ec.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3A4E819C...@ec.rr.com...
Steven P. McNicoll
>
> If you had read the entire message you would have noticed that I did not
> claim it was a direct flight.
>
I read it all, you missed the point. "No User" claimed a KC-135 set a
record for the longest distance flown on a single load of fuel, you
responded that you remembered it as a Buenos Aires to Andrews AFB flight.
But the KC-135 never held that record, and a flight from Buenos Aires to
Andrews wouldn't come close to breaking the record that existed at the time.
>
> Record flights can wander all over the map as long as destination to
> destination record is not claimed.
>
Destination to destination? A distance record need not be a direct flight,
but you only get credit for the distance between the start and finish.
>
> The NAA or FAI observer is the one who you have to satisfy as to route
> and whether it is direct or closed course.
>
A "closed course" returns to the starting point.
BUFDRVR
>instance of a b-47 refueling Looking Glass and I, as a controller, launched
>a B-52 to refuel a tanker.
>
I hope the tanker didn't need much gas or had plenty of time. We only pump at
approx. 1,000-1,200 lbs/min.
BUFDRVR
"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"
Rex
photo proof. I'd post it here, but there is always a purist who
points out that this isn't a binary group, so go to
Alt.Binaries.Pictures.Aviation
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000 23:59:49 -0500, sm...@smackfu.com (Smack) wrote:
>Basically, are the tanks/fuel cells that are connected to the refueling
>probe also connected to the plane's own engines? And if so, what would
>be the range of a KC-135 w/ a full load and without any other refueling
>done? It would have to be a pretty incredible distance!
>
>Thanks,
>
>Scott
Ron Parsons
(Smack) wrote:
>Basically, are the tanks/fuel cells that are connected to the refueling
>probe also connected to the plane's own engines? And if so, what would
>be the range of a KC-135 w/ a full load and without any other refueling
>done? It would have to be a pretty incredible distance!
All tanks can be used for both purposes, either for the tanker or for
the receiver right down to the last drop.
In the late 50's, LeMay took one from Japan to the Azores. Lots of
weather and wind scouts in front of them. There was still gas left to
make Spain, but they decided not to risk it.
I used to joke at the time, that if you wanted to go farther with a
KC-135, you would just go the other way.
I did know a crew who flew Yakoda to Offiut in the early 60's without
weather scouts. Just a normal return from deployment.
--
Ron
Irish
>
<<SNIP>>
>
> I did know a crew who flew Yakoda to Offiut in the early 60's without
> weather scouts. Just a normal return from deployment.
>
> --
> Ron
They still do this all the time, also going the other way to Southwest
Asia.
--
"Irish" -I speak for no one, no one speaks for me-
-Normal disclaimer's apply-
We must reject the idea that every time a law is broken, society is
guilty rather than the lawbreaker.
It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is
accountable for his actions. Ronald Reagan
Remember the three R's:
Respect for self - Respect for others - Responsibility for all your
actions
NOTICE TO BULK E-MAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5,
Subchapter II, 227, and all non-solicited commercial e-mail sent to
this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount
of $500 US. In addition, all unsolicited email will be read at a
charge
of $500 per item. Receipt of such email shall be considered to
constitute
acceptance of contract, and will be billed immediately.
"By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets
the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is
unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment. By
Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is
punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500,
whichever
is greater, for each violation."
falco...@my-deja.com
Ron Parsons <jr...@gte.net> wrote:
> In article <MPG.14b5e450...@news.snet.net>,
sm...@smackfu.com
> (Smack) wrote:
>
> >Basically, are the tanks/fuel cells that are connected to the
refueling
> >probe also connected to the plane's own engines? And if so, what
would
> >be the range of a KC-135 w/ a full load and without any other
refueling
> >done? It would have to be a pretty incredible distance!
>
> All tanks can be used for both purposes, either for the tanker or for
> the receiver right down to the last drop.
>
Uh, no. On the KC-135Q (and later T) the tanks are isolated from the
engine-feed tanks to allow JP-8 for the SR-71 re-fuel missions.
Yes, I *do* know everything! (I think.... :)
--
-falconfixer-
Motto:
"If i can't fix it - i'll fix it so no one can!"
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
KenG
close, but oh so wrong. KC-135Q could draw fuel from the body tanks and
burn in the engines. The primary manifolding allowed isolation of fuel, but
still provided for the eventuality of using any fuel the aircraft was
carrying. Some Qs were assigned regular tanker duties but were still
required to carry at least 500 lb of JP7 in the upper deck tank to be used
if tasked for a Q mission. This would require in-flight dumping of JP4 from
the body tanks followed by a flushing of the body tanks with the JP7. The
tanker would then land, take on JP7 in the body tanks and proceed with the
Q mission. Curiously, I never was aware of any use of this scenario. BTW
the "Q"s have also carried other liquids in the body tanks, most notably
water used in flight testing for susceptibility to wing and prop icing and
to test the capability of engines to ingest H2O without flameout. I'm not
sure about the capabilities of of the "T"s but I can't imagine that they
would have removed this function.
KEN
supe...@worldnet.att.net
falco...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <jrp59-990369....@news.gte.net>,
> Ron Parsons <jr...@gte.net> wrote:
> > In article <MPG.14b5e450...@news.snet.net>,
> sm...@smackfu.com
> > (Smack) wrote:
> >
> > >Basically, are the tanks/fuel cells that are connected to the
> refueling
> > >probe also connected to the plane's own engines? And if so, what
> would
> > >be the range of a KC-135 w/ a full load and without any other
> refueling
> > >done? It would have to be a pretty incredible distance!
> >
> > All tanks can be used for both purposes, either for the tanker or
for
> > the receiver right down to the last drop.
> >
>
> Uh, no. On the KC-135Q (and later T) the tanks are isolated from the
> engine-feed tanks to allow JP-8 for the SR-71 re-fuel missions.
>
> Yes, I *do* know everything! (I think.... :)
supertec
frankies...@gmail.com
Daryl
> I am a member of the "WAFFLE HEAD" Club.... And a member of what I call "BLACK JACK" Club.. Anyone who has hit their head on a VHF antenna ...
>
backflushes from something with a refueling recepticle. Like a Buff or
an EC. So, can it be done? Yes, but the why comes up on that question.
--
Visit http://droopyvids.com for free TV and Movies. One of
the Largest Collections of Public Domain and Classic TV on
the Internet.
Peter Stickney
> On 6/12/2014 2:14 AM, frankies...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I am a member of the "WAFFLE HEAD" Club.... And a member of what I call
>> "BLACK JACK" Club.. Anyone who has hit their head on a VHF antenna ...
>>
>
> So am I. But, no the KC-135 can give but not receive unless it
> backflushes from something with a refueling recepticle. Like a Buff or
> an EC. So, can it be done? Yes, but the why comes up on that question.
All but about 6,000# of fuel can go out of the boom.
Some 135s are/were refuelable by other aircraft - some had slipways and boom
sockets (especially the EC-135s), and some others had transfer pumps that
would allow them to pull fuel from a B-52 up through the boom.
--
Pete Stickney
From the foothills of the Florida Alps
Daryl
modded KC-135R (converted As) and go for an around the world trip. The
plan was to fly west and meet up with a Buff over Madagascar to
backflush. The SAC decided to leave the record with the Buff. Did I
ever tell you I hated SAC?
Walt BJ
Lastly do not brush palms across snow tires on jets - the abraded wire tips will get you. Many many more but that's enough for now.
Walt BJ
Daryl
coffelt2
"Walt BJ" <walt...@what-wire.com> wrote in message news:ea2b1716-decb-4ad4...@googlegroups.com...
'Waffle head Club' reminds me of the times I've been bit by an airplane. I have a blue dent in my forehead from the hitting the inside corner of an extended 104 TE flap surfacing from preflighting the engine bay. Put a folded hanky on it and donned my helmet to go fly. 58 years and it's still visible. Walked into the inboard pylon of an F4 in the dark. That pointed tip was like a karate stab to the gut; took about fifteen minutes for the effects to wear off. The F4 rear seat had a black box right side aft guaranteed to paralyze your right elbow if you thrashed around energetically checking six. Oh yes you can indeed cut your hand on the 104's LE flap - if the newbie filing the hangar rash fails to kill the edge he created. Birds on alert five with 'power on' have HOT pitot tips . . .
Lastly do not brush palms across snow tires on jets - the abraded wire tips will get you. Many many more but that's enough for now.Walt BJ
F-4 inboard pylon..... F-104 TE flap......... F-84 and F-86 Snow Tires... All dangerous weapons designed by the enemy.Old Chief Lynn
Panic
On 6/12/2014 3:38 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
> Daryl wrote:
>
>> On 6/12/2014 2:14 AM, frankies...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I am a member of the "WAFFLE HEAD" Club.... And a member of what I call
>>> "BLACK JACK" Club.. Anyone who has hit their head on a VHF antenna ...
>>>
>>
>> So am I. But, no the KC-135 can give but not receive unless it
>> backflushes from something with a refueling recepticle. Like a Buff or
>> an EC. So, can it be done? Yes, but the why comes up on that question.
>
> The Silver Sow doesn't need to refuel itself (At least within the
> airplane)
> All but about 6,000# of fuel can go out of the boom.
>
> Some 135s are/were refuelable by other aircraft - some had slipways and
> boom
> sockets (especially the EC-135s), and some others had transfer pumps that
> would allow them to pull fuel from a B-52 up through the boom.
>
Our Wing King wanted to go for yet another record with the brand new
modded KC-135R (converted As) and go for an around the world trip. The
plan was to fly west and meet up with a Buff over Madagascar to
backflush. The SAC decided to leave the record with the Buff. Did I
ever tell you I hated SAC?
I was always trying to get out of SAC. But..it did give me a spot
promotion.
Daryl
across the pond leaving Europe when I boarded the 4th boat that sailed
with Columbus; The Nina, The Pinta, The Santa Maria, and the SAC.
Little is known about the 4th ship. But take it from me, it sailed off
the edge of the earth into a Nightmare called SacLand.
Panic
distinguish between the unfortunate and the incompetent"!!! That's the
way he ran SAC. A crewmember in SAC was like a bitch in heat! You were
always running, with something snapping at your heels...and you stop once
and you're F__ked!
kyu...@gmail.com
> Basically, are the tanks/fuel cells that are connected to the refueling
> probe also connected to the plane's own engines? And if so, what would
> be the range of a KC-135 w/ a full load and without any other refueling
> done? It would have to be a pretty incredible distance!
>
>
> Scott
This is a very old thread, but I'll post here anyway.
A KC-135 with only a boom can receive fuel from the receiver. It's called reverse refueling. It's slow and obviously only used in emergencies.