Mid-Atlantic MilAir 2023

Status
Not open for further replies.

MUTNAV

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
1,262

That's a slow offload.

The flight track
You know, I usually keep up with military stuff fairly well, but a C-5M being used as a "reverse re-fueler", is beyond bizarre, never heard or even thought about such a thing, and I have a fairly vivid imagination.

Has ANYONE seen any other references to this kind of thing?

OR was this thing a little bit of a joke?

Thanks
Joel
 

N4TX

Scanning since the age of crystal scanners.
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
335
Location
West Virginia
I'd be interested in "reverse refueling," too. The Boeing fact sheet on the tanker includes the blurb "Unlike many existing tankers, the KC-46A can also receive fuel, which significantly extends the range and flexibility of global mobility and power projection maneuvers."

I do know that there have been some trials of using C-17s with big bladders to fuel other aircraft, but that was done with both aircraft on the ground.
 

Mark

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 14, 2001
Messages
14,009
Location
Northeast Maryland
EXEC1F from KILG to Andrews GLF5 #20-1949.. Saving fuel?

The 3 refurbished Offutt nuke sniffers are complete now.. I imagine The Korea peninsula and Japan area prob will be regular haunt.
 
Last edited:

MUTNAV

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
1,262
I'd be interested in "reverse refueling," too. The Boeing fact sheet on the tanker includes the blurb "Unlike many existing tankers, the KC-46A can also receive fuel, which significantly extends the range and flexibility of global mobility and power projection maneuvers."

I do know that there have been some trials of using C-17s with big bladders to fuel other aircraft, but that was done with both aircraft on the ground.
Right.... They've done the ground refueling part for awhile, tired and true, called bladder birds. The most imaginative arrangement was in
Afghanistan where a CH-53 repeatedly would land to refuel ground forces, and going up to a KC-130 to refuel, I don't know if the KC-130 had to refuel from a KC-135.

I thought what they meant when they said "capable of receiving fuel" is that it has its own receiving receptacle, like certain KC-135s', not that it would stick it's refueling tongue down another aircrafts throat (so to speak)....

I admit it's imaginative, but there are probably 4 or more different, and better, ways to do what is wanted (for the stated purpose).

Thanks
Joel
 

Mark

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 14, 2001
Messages
14,009
Location
Northeast Maryland
I admit it's imaginative, but there are probably 4 or more different, and better, ways to do what is wanted (for the stated purpose).

Thanks
Joel
A lot of these imaginative inter mil fueling operations though I think also speak of a larger problem
in the Military today.. Lack of new recruits are forcing these folks to come up with some of these new ideas.
Already we really have lots of tankers but not all the aircrews and ground crews to man them.. Even the USAF has signed on now
for private tankers to help out.
That is why I think tanker drones aka the US Navy will be the eventual future of a lot of military aviation.. Like it or not it is happening already.
 

john8436

Active Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
587
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Does anyone know which units received the 108th WG/141st ARS NJ ANG KC-135's?

I know that 60-0366 is going to 101st ARW ME ANG. Also I see 63-8003 is flying from Scott AFB so I assume it is now assigned the AFRC unit at Scott.

Thanks for any info you might have!!
 

MUTNAV

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
1,262
A lot of these imaginative inter mil fueling operations though I think also speak of a larger problem
in the Military today.. Lack of new recruits are forcing these folks to come up with some of these new ideas.
Already we really have lots of tankers but not all the aircrews and ground crews to man them.. Even the USAF has signed on now
for private tankers to help out.
That is why I think tanker drones aka the US Navy will be the eventual future of a lot of military aviation.. Like it or not it is happening already.
I agree to a point.... I think the military has become the big E (entitled) and they have to have the best people, equipment etc.... You have to be able to pass an enhanced (compared to the cold war) physical fitness test before even entering the military....

The Air Force used to have "Fat Boy" flights, where people in basic training that couldn't meet weight or fitness requirements were sent...

We're lacking a lot of things in the military, and civilian leadership, (and society in general), unfortunately not many people (if any, including myself) seem to be able to recognize what they are, and even fewer what to do about it, and there is no reasonable discussion to even talk about it...

I'd be pleasantry surprised at this point if the Air force went to an automated boom operation.

Thanks
Joel
 

RaleighGuy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
14,208
Location
Raleigh, NC
POTUS travels to Milwaukee Wednesday...

EST

9:35 AM THE PRESIDENT departs the White House en route to Joint Base Andrews

South Lawn

9:55 AM THE PRESIDENT departs Joint Base Andrews en route to Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Joint Base Andrews

CST

10:45 AM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

2:55 PM THE PRESIDENT departs Milwaukee, Wisconsin en route to Joint Base Andrews
Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

EST

5:40 PM THE PRESIDENT arrives at Joint Base Andrews
Joint Base Andrews
 

jsoergel

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
2,100
Location
Cincinnati/Dayton, OH
I'd be interested in "reverse refueling," too. The Boeing fact sheet on the tanker includes the blurb "Unlike many existing tankers, the KC-46A can also receive fuel, which significantly extends the range and flexibility of global mobility and power projection maneuvers."

I do know that there have been some trials of using C-17s with big bladders to fuel other aircraft, but that was done with both aircraft on the ground.
Via “KC-10 Driver.”
 

TerryPavlick

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
3,512
Location
Wallingford PA Villas NJ

TerryPavlick

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
3,512
Location
Wallingford PA Villas NJ
I was reviewing the flight path and listening to the audio from LiveATC. They did not report any issues leaving the Atlantic City radar frequency.
However - they did approach reasonably close to a flight of 3 C130s from Wilmington that were busy at Warren Grove Range and were working with Atlantic City radar.
Just thinking out loud here but the below shows a very close approach vertically and laterally to the flight of C130s. Just wondering if the combined wake turbulence of 12 engines may have caused an issue. I am sure NTSB will investigate the cause but just seemed to close to me to not be suspect.
1703076624489.png

1703077077693.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top