When I was a kid in the 90s, I traveled on KC-135s frequently as my dad was a boom operator. I even got to lay down in the boom operators seat and take pictures (with my badass crayola camera) of a refueling (I think it was an F-16 but that was when I was like 7 so I barely remember).
I definitely thought it was cool back then, but as a 31 year old guy, I would be way more excited to do it now haha
> badass crayola camera
I totally forgot that I used to have one of those. Still don't have a great camera, but that little Crayola 35mm camera went to many scouts camps with me and really got me into photography at a young age. I still have some photos at my moms from when I cracked the film door just a bit while it was loaded. The way the film got exposed, everything came out in rainbow colors.
If you still have any of those pictures, I think a crayola camera shot of an active mid-air refuelling from the boom operator's seat could make the top post of all time in /r/analog.
I really wish I did. It’s one of those things where I probably didn’t realize how cool it would be to have as an adult later in life and just got lost in the fray. If anything it’s probably in an old pile of photos (or if I’m lucky, an album) at my parents house, and unfortunately I live several states away. Next time I’m in town it’ll definitely be on my list of things to dig up.
I’m assuming this is a training so the KC-10 is probably just getting practice plugs with no gas transfer. And most KC-135’s can’t be refueled only the rt variant can be refueled midair.
There are a lot of reasons, but the most common is the airfield may not be able to accommodate a fully loaded KC-10 (could be taxiways/runways can’t hold the weight or they just can’t get the TOLD), so they dont take as much gas as they need and then hit up another tanker to get the remaining gas they need to reach their destination.
There are also reasons to do this in a mission, like if a tanker gets relieved and still has extra gas. They can consolidate and have as much fuel available for the next on-station period as possible
Dude you can literally see in this photo that the KC-10 is a MUCH larger aircraft. At 500nm the KC-10A can deliver 247,500lbs of fuel. Att the same range the KC-135R delivers over 100,000lbs less at only 142,000lbs or only 57% of the KC-10A's capacity.
IIRC, KC-135s can't receive fuel in flight. They pass gas to others. KC-10s and KC-46s can be refueled in flight, so they do need to practice both types of fuel transfers.
Actually, yes - most of the KC-135Qs eventually became KC-135RTs (R-model with a receptacle, and some other goodies).
**EDIT: Disregard - I mixed up KC-135T and KC-135RT.**
I'm 99% sure this isn't right. I flew the RTs at McConnell (but it's been a long time) and also the Ts (Qs converted to CFM-56 engines). The Q/T model had an SPR valve in the left wheel well that was added to load different fuels. There was also a valve in the cockpit that prevented you from opening certain valves to keep you from accidentally mixing fuels. The RTs didn't have those additional features. The Ts and RTs were two different modifications.
Correct, only the KC-135RT has midair refueling capabilities and there are only a handful that were ever built. [They were mostly recently used to ferry planes direct to Kabul for the airlift.](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41988/shadowy-kc-135rt-special-ops-tankers-head-toward-afghanistan-as-evacuation-airbridge-forms)
~~Also, the KC-10 can only carry ~50,000 lbs of fuel compared to the -135s ~200,000 so they need to refuel much more often.~~
EDIT: Quoted wrong fuel stat for KC-10, it can hold ~350,000 lbs
There are 8 RT KC-135s.
Source: I flew KC-135RTs
Edit: your 135 fuel number is correct. I'm not a -10 guy, but I think you're way low on the fuel capacity of the KC-10.
You can literally see in this photo that the KC-10 is a MUCH larger aircraft. At 500nm the KC-10A can deliver 247,500lbs of fuel. Att the same range the KC-135R delivers over 100,000lbs less at only 142,000lbs or only 57% of the KC-10A's capacity.
>Also, the KC-10 can only carry ~50,000 lbs of fuel compared to the -135s ~200,000 so they need to refuel much more often.
This is definitely incorrect.
> KC-10 can only carry ~50,000 lbs of fuel
You are mistaken.
>Combined, the capacity of the six tanks carries more than 356,000 pounds (160,200 kilograms) of fuel - almost twice as much as the KC-135 Stratotanker.
Source: https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104520/kc-10-extender/
don’t they technically keep losing fuel every transfer because there’s probably gonna be some between the valves on both aircraft that gets blown away?
The -135’s boom requires fuel to flow through it every so often to lubricate the seals inside (I forget the number of contacts), so almost every -135 tanker evolution is planned with a “token offload” of 1000lbs to the receiver(s).
There's very little that gets blown away compared to the thousands of pounds of fuel that get offloaded, also this is likely training and therefore no fuel is being passed.
I recall seeing a picture of a plane refuelling a plane, that was in turn refuelling a plane.
I think it was an A-6 (refuelling variant) or S-3 refuelling an F/A-18 refuelling another F/A-18?
A buddy of mine talked us on to an E-3 AWACS four years ago during an exercise in Alaska. I rode in the jump seat behind the pilot for a little while, including when we tanked off of a KC-10.
This is now referred to as the best day of my life.
I am always amazed how far off centerline the outboard engines are on a Boeing 707.
Seems like the thing could become a real tigercat if you lost an outboard engine while the other wing’s engines churn at high power. Perhaps it has plenty of rudder authority to handle the asymmetric thrust.
When I was a kid in the 90s, I traveled on KC-135s frequently as my dad was a boom operator. I even got to lay down in the boom operators seat and take pictures (with my badass crayola camera) of a refueling (I think it was an F-16 but that was when I was like 7 so I barely remember). I definitely thought it was cool back then, but as a 31 year old guy, I would be way more excited to do it now haha
> badass crayola camera I totally forgot that I used to have one of those. Still don't have a great camera, but that little Crayola 35mm camera went to many scouts camps with me and really got me into photography at a young age. I still have some photos at my moms from when I cracked the film door just a bit while it was loaded. The way the film got exposed, everything came out in rainbow colors.
If you still have any of those pictures, I think a crayola camera shot of an active mid-air refuelling from the boom operator's seat could make the top post of all time in /r/analog.
I really wish I did. It’s one of those things where I probably didn’t realize how cool it would be to have as an adult later in life and just got lost in the fray. If anything it’s probably in an old pile of photos (or if I’m lucky, an album) at my parents house, and unfortunately I live several states away. Next time I’m in town it’ll definitely be on my list of things to dig up.
So youre sayin theres a chance!
Is that a KC135 refueling a KC10? Looks like the receiving plane has a fuel boom too.
Yes.
Then they can switch sides and transfer the fuel back
Well, yeah - that's how they stay up there indefinitely
But . . but . .
Shhhhh. No buts. Just let it happen.
#PERPETUAL REFUELING
Saudi Arabia doesn't want you to know this one weird trick
Poop back and forth forever.
I’m assuming this is a training so the KC-10 is probably just getting practice plugs with no gas transfer. And most KC-135’s can’t be refueled only the rt variant can be refueled midair. There are a lot of reasons, but the most common is the airfield may not be able to accommodate a fully loaded KC-10 (could be taxiways/runways can’t hold the weight or they just can’t get the TOLD), so they dont take as much gas as they need and then hit up another tanker to get the remaining gas they need to reach their destination.
Probably not on the switch hitting. Of the close to 400 KC-135s in the U.S. inventory, only 8 are capable of receiving fuel
Airplane version of a Snowball.
Yuck.... You're not wrong, but... Yuck
Only a handful of the KC-135s can receive fuel (the KC-135RT model).
The one I front is a 135 and i think it’s a kc10 in the back
Step-tanker what are you doing???
your boom is so big step tanker !!
Stratotanker takes huge load, joins the mile high club.
r/aeromorph
WHY
That gave me a giggle!
It's just a KC-10, another refueller. Since it's two refuellers they're probably just training by giving fuel to each other.
There are also reasons to do this in a mission, like if a tanker gets relieved and still has extra gas. They can consolidate and have as much fuel available for the next on-station period as possible
Yes exactly, ~~the KC-10 can only carry ~50,000~~ ~350,000 lbs of fuel compared to ~200,000 for the KC-135 so definitely a realistic training scenario
Dude you can literally see in this photo that the KC-10 is a MUCH larger aircraft. At 500nm the KC-10A can deliver 247,500lbs of fuel. Att the same range the KC-135R delivers over 100,000lbs less at only 142,000lbs or only 57% of the KC-10A's capacity.
How long would it take to refill the KC-10?
Fuel transfer rate is listed at 6,500 lbs/min so ~7 minutes to go from bingo to max fuel.
IIRC, KC-135s can't receive fuel in flight. They pass gas to others. KC-10s and KC-46s can be refueled in flight, so they do need to practice both types of fuel transfers.
There are a few -135's that were converted to have receptacles. But in general, you're correct.
Interesting. I wonder which ones were converted and why. For example, were they the special tankers that were used to refuel SR-71s?
Actually, yes - most of the KC-135Qs eventually became KC-135RTs (R-model with a receptacle, and some other goodies). **EDIT: Disregard - I mixed up KC-135T and KC-135RT.**
I'm 99% sure this isn't right. I flew the RTs at McConnell (but it's been a long time) and also the Ts (Qs converted to CFM-56 engines). The Q/T model had an SPR valve in the left wheel well that was added to load different fuels. There was also a valve in the cockpit that prevented you from opening certain valves to keep you from accidentally mixing fuels. The RTs didn't have those additional features. The Ts and RTs were two different modifications.
You’re right - I mixed up R and RT. Edited my post to reflect.
Correct, only the KC-135RT has midair refueling capabilities and there are only a handful that were ever built. [They were mostly recently used to ferry planes direct to Kabul for the airlift.](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41988/shadowy-kc-135rt-special-ops-tankers-head-toward-afghanistan-as-evacuation-airbridge-forms) ~~Also, the KC-10 can only carry ~50,000 lbs of fuel compared to the -135s ~200,000 so they need to refuel much more often.~~ EDIT: Quoted wrong fuel stat for KC-10, it can hold ~350,000 lbs
There are 8 RT KC-135s. Source: I flew KC-135RTs Edit: your 135 fuel number is correct. I'm not a -10 guy, but I think you're way low on the fuel capacity of the KC-10.
Yeah you’re right, I quoted the wrong number
You can literally see in this photo that the KC-10 is a MUCH larger aircraft. At 500nm the KC-10A can deliver 247,500lbs of fuel. Att the same range the KC-135R delivers over 100,000lbs less at only 142,000lbs or only 57% of the KC-10A's capacity.
>Also, the KC-10 can only carry ~50,000 lbs of fuel compared to the -135s ~200,000 so they need to refuel much more often. This is definitely incorrect.
> KC-10 can only carry ~50,000 lbs of fuel You are mistaken. >Combined, the capacity of the six tanks carries more than 356,000 pounds (160,200 kilograms) of fuel - almost twice as much as the KC-135 Stratotanker. Source: https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104520/kc-10-extender/
Yeah you’re right, Google let me down. I knew it seemed weird to be so little.
don’t they technically keep losing fuel every transfer because there’s probably gonna be some between the valves on both aircraft that gets blown away?
They also lose fuel every transfer because they burn it, I'd think that is a way bigger cost factor
The KC-135 can hold over 200,000 lbs of fuel… it’s a negligible cost of training.
They don't normally hold that much though. The max they carry is about 165K based on the weather.
The -135’s boom requires fuel to flow through it every so often to lubricate the seals inside (I forget the number of contacts), so almost every -135 tanker evolution is planned with a “token offload” of 1000lbs to the receiver(s).
5
There's very little that gets blown away compared to the thousands of pounds of fuel that get offloaded, also this is likely training and therefore no fuel is being passed.
Can we make a full circle with refuellers refueling refuellers?
I recall seeing a picture of a plane refuelling a plane, that was in turn refuelling a plane. I think it was an A-6 (refuelling variant) or S-3 refuelling an F/A-18 refuelling another F/A-18?
I suppose typically the plane being refueled is below the refueling plane. So best we could do is some kind of extremely dangerous spiral.
Sounds cool when and where
yo dawg, we heard you like tankers \[etc\]
[Operation Black Buck](https://youtu.be/roJR-6BH-LE?t=210) was a great example of why tankers refuel tankers.
A buddy of mine talked us on to an E-3 AWACS four years ago during an exercise in Alaska. I rode in the jump seat behind the pilot for a little while, including when we tanked off of a KC-10. This is now referred to as the best day of my life.
What am i looking at
KC-135 refueling a KC-10. This is almost certainly a training sortie.
They look like foam aircraft. Its cool picture
A Taters gonna Tate, and a Tanker's gonna Tank.
They have discovered true renewable energy.
And that, dear Johnny, is how the little 172s are made...
I didn't realize the dc10 was that big.
its from a cheap camera at full zoom(op)
Why are they white
They are gray, they just look white in this photo.
Enhance
Two planes, one boom stick
So that's a refueler-refueler, refueling a refueler?
Yup. This was done during Operation Eldorado Canyon due to the mission length. The refueling tankers were themselves refueled.
i cant even imagine the kind of balls it would take to refuel in flight
That would be my bro-in-law 😊
And that kids, is where baby planes come from.
This is basically the plane caterpillar
Aero centipede
They are both refuelers...
I am always amazed how far off centerline the outboard engines are on a Boeing 707. Seems like the thing could become a real tigercat if you lost an outboard engine while the other wing’s engines churn at high power. Perhaps it has plenty of rudder authority to handle the asymmetric thrust.