A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Trying to find resources on tanker history



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 2nd 04, 03:17 AM
Henry J Cobb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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
  #2  
Old June 2nd 04, 03:38 AM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
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.


The boom operator is neither trained nor paid as a pilot, so your point
would be...?

Brooks

-HJC



  #3  
Old June 2nd 04, 05:16 AM
Henry J Cobb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kevin Brooks wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
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.


The boom operator is neither trained nor paid as a pilot, so your point
would be...?


"Fly the boom" is a common phrase in the USAF.

http://www.afmc.wpafb.af.mil/HQ-AFMC...eb/0226-03.htm

You need three people adjusting airfoils to make boom refueling work.

That's one more person than is needed for a probe and drogue refueling.

Heck, you could make an unmanned tanker for probe and drogue refueling.

-HJC
  #4  
Old June 2nd 04, 02:35 PM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
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.


The boom operator is neither trained nor paid as a pilot, so your point
would be...?


"Fly the boom" is a common phrase in the USAF.

http://www.afmc.wpafb.af.mil/HQ-AFMC...eb/0226-03.htm

You need three people adjusting airfoils to make boom refueling work.

That's one more person than is needed for a probe and drogue refueling.

Heck, you could make an unmanned tanker for probe and drogue refueling.


You are still not making any sense. A boom operator is not a pilot. Flying
boom tankers are proven to handle a greater transfer rate than
hose-and-drogue tankers. So again, your point would be...?

Brooks

-HJC



  #5  
Old June 2nd 04, 10:56 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 19:17:23 -0700, Henry J Cobb wrote:

One pilot for each aircraft and then somebody in the back of the tanker
to fly the boom.


The boom handler is a pilot? Why?

There used to be a joke about flying up dead-end canyons: don't do it
unless you've learned how to fly a plane backwards. Presumably a boom
operator could do just that.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.