![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Guy Alcala wrote:
A boom receptacle, OTOH, is theoretically only limited in diameter by the fuel flow rates that the a/c's internal fuel piping is designed to deal with; since the flow rate in A/B is quite high, and since none of this is adding weight/drag outside the airframe, transfer rates can be much higher with little/no weight penalty on the receiver. The tanker is paying the weight/drag penalty of the boom, but it's a lot larger and can afford it. And then you've got three pilots. One pilot for each aircraft and then somebody in the back of the tanker to fly the boom. -HJC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Naval Air Refueling Needs Deferred in Air Force Tanker Plan | Henry J Cobb | Military Aviation | 47 | May 22nd 04 03:36 AM |
Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight? | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 106 | May 12th 04 07:18 AM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements | me | Military Aviation | 146 | January 15th 04 10:13 PM |
EADS aims at USAF tanker market | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 0 | September 20th 03 05:54 PM |
FS: Aviation History Books | Neil Cournoyer | Military Aviation | 0 | August 26th 03 08:32 PM |