First Modern Air-Air refueling

When was the first modern air-air refueling? By modern I mean
"compatible with a modern tanker/receiver (either boom or hose)".

This question seems to be tricky, in that many of the early systems
would not be compatible with a modern airplane.

For bonus points, when was the first carrier based refueling done?
Both the tanker and receiver must be carrier based, but the buddy
system works.

-Charles Talleyrand

In message
,
Charles Talleyrand writes
When was the first modern air-air refueling? By modern I mean
"compatible with a modern tanker/receiver (either boom or hose)".

This question seems to be tricky, in that many of the early systems
would not be compatible with a modern airplane.

AFAIK Flight Refuelling Ltd was the pioneer in probe and drogue systems.

http://www.cobham75.com/cobham-the-c...-air-refuellin
g-takes-off.aspx

For bonus points, when was the first carrier based refueling done?
Both the tanker and receiver must be carrier based, but the buddy
system works.

Possibly FR again.

I have seen (a few decades ago) a picture of a mixed bunch of a number
of aircraft in line using the buddy system. ISTR there was a Sea Vixen,
a Buccaneer and an A-3 or A-4, maybe more. Anyone know the photo?

-Charles Talleyrand

--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

On Jun 3, 12:57*pm, Peter Twydell wrote:
In message
,
Charles Talleyrand writesWhen was the first modern air-air refueling? *By modern I mean
"compatible with a modern tanker/receiver (either boom or hose)".

This question seems to be tricky, in that many of the early systems
would not be compatible with a modern airplane.

AFAIK Flight Refuelling Ltd was the pioneer in probe and drogue systems.

http://www.cobham75.com/cobham-the-c...r-to-air-refue...
g-takes-off.aspx

That's true. But the early work by them was using the "loop" method,
and a modern F-18 could not hook up. The early KC-29s were also
incompatible.


For bonus points, when was the first carrier based refueling done?
Both the tanker and receiver must be carrier based, but the buddy
system works.

Possibly FR again.

I have seen (a few decades ago) a picture of a mixed bunch of a number
of aircraft in line using the buddy system. ISTR there was a Sea Vixen,
a Buccaneer and an A-3 or A-4, maybe more. Anyone know the photo?


I do know that an A-1 Skyraider could buddy refuel, but I don't know
when this was developed.

There is something I don't understand though. I cannot imagine an A-1
offloading more than 8,000 pounds of fuel (wild guess based on gross
and empty weight). How much fuel did a jet of that era use. It
doesn't seem productive to me, so I figure I must be missing
something.

-Randy

In message
,
Charles Talleyrand writes
On Jun 3, 12:57*pm, Peter Twydell wrote:
In message
,
Charles Talleyrand writesWhen was the first
modern air-air refueling? *By modern I mean
"compatible with a modern tanker/receiver (either boom or hose)".

This question seems to be tricky, in that many of the early systems
would not be compatible with a modern airplane.

AFAIK Flight Refuelling Ltd was the pioneer in probe and drogue systems.

http://www.cobham75.com/cobham-the-c...r-to-air-refue...
g-takes-off.aspx

That's true. But the early work by them was using the "loop" method,
and a modern F-18 could not hook up. The early KC-29s were also
incompatible.


Yes, the early work was the loop method, as the article says. Read it
carefully and you'll see that they developed the probe and drogue
system, which is one of the two modern systems. The latest versions
might well differ from the early ones, but the principle is the same. FR
(now Cobham) have always been at the forefront, so it's probably them in
any case.


For bonus points, when was the first carrier based refueling done?
Both the tanker and receiver must be carrier based, but the buddy
system works.

Possibly FR again.

I have seen (a few decades ago) a picture of a mixed bunch of a number
of aircraft in line using the buddy system. ISTR there was a Sea Vixen,
a Buccaneer and an A-3 or A-4, maybe more. Anyone know the photo?


I do know that an A-1 Skyraider could buddy refuel, but I don't know
when this was developed.

There is something I don't understand though. I cannot imagine an A-1
offloading more than 8,000 pounds of fuel (wild guess based on gross
and empty weight). How much fuel did a jet of that era use. It
doesn't seem productive to me, so I figure I must be missing
something.


Depends how much the receiver needs, I suppose. Enough to get you back
to the carrier would do.

-Randy



--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

Charles Talleyrand wrote:

I do know that an A-1 Skyraider could buddy refuel, but I don't know
when this was developed.

There is something I don't understand though. I cannot imagine an A-1
offloading more than 8,000 pounds of fuel (wild guess based on gross
and empty weight). How much fuel did a jet of that era use. It
doesn't seem productive to me, so I figure I must be missing
something.

In the 80s and 90s, 2,000# was a standard give to a single airplane
(F-4, A-6, A-7...) in many cases, and a full-cycle A-6 tanker had about
10K total to give. Give 4K to a pair of F-4s off the cat and save 6
for the recovery. Might get a bit more by consolidating from the
offgoing tanker.

On 3 June, 22:01, Peter Twydell wrote:
In message
,
Charles Talleyrand writes





On Jun 3, 12:57 pm, Peter Twydell wrote:
In message
,
Charles Talleyrand writesWhen was the first
modern air-air refueling? By modern I mean
"compatible with a modern tanker/receiver (either boom or hose)".

This question seems to be tricky, in that many of the early systems
would not be compatible with a modern airplane.

AFAIK Flight Refuelling Ltd was the pioneer in probe and drogue systems.

http://www.cobham75.com/cobham-the-c...r-to-air-refue....
g-takes-off.aspx

That's true. *But the early work by them was using the "loop" method,
and a modern F-18 could not hook up. *The early KC-29s were also
incompatible.

Yes, the early work was the loop method, as the article says. Read it
carefully and you'll see that they developed the probe and drogue
system, which is one of the two modern systems. The latest versions
might well differ from the early ones, but the principle is the same. FR
(now Cobham) have always been at the forefront, so it's probably them in
any case.







For bonus points, when was the first carrier based refueling done?
Both the tanker and receiver must be carrier based, but the buddy
system works.

Possibly FR again.

I have seen (a few decades ago) a picture of a mixed bunch of a number
of aircraft in line using the buddy system. ISTR there was a Sea Vixen,
a Buccaneer and an A-3 or A-4, maybe more. Anyone know the photo?

I do know that an A-1 Skyraider could buddy refuel, but I don't know
when this was developed.

There is something I don't understand though. *I cannot imagine an A-1
offloading more than 8,000 pounds of fuel (wild guess based on gross
and empty weight). *How much fuel did a jet of that era use. *It
doesn't seem productive to me, so I figure I must be missing
something.

Depends how much the receiver needs, I suppose. Enough to get you back
to the carrier would do.

-Randy

--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Did they not develop a system to refuel Tiger Force Lancasters/
Lincolns for the assault on Japan?

Guy

"guy" wrote in message
...
On 3 June, 22:01, Peter Twydell wrote:


Did they not develop a system to refuel Tiger Force Lancasters/
Lincolns for the assault on Japan?

Guy

Yes. In January 1944 three different designs had been prepared, the third
of which was adopted. In this the hose-drum and equipment was placed towards
the front of the aircraft and the fuel supply consisted of two 640 imperial
gallon (2,880 litres) tanks in the bomb bay.

50 sets of equipment were ordered for development and training. It was then
intended to convert a total of 500 tanker and receiver aircraft to mount the
long-range operations.

Trials for the Tiger Force operation were carried out with the prototype
Lancaster tanker PB.972 and receiver ND.648, using the looped hose system.
It was found that refuelling could be carried out at an indicated airspeed
of 160 mph at any reasonable altitude, over or in cloud and at night, there
being no difficulty in illuminating the receiver's hauling cable.

Then the Americans went and dropped a couple of really big bombs.

Keith

On Jun 3, 11:05*pm, "John Weiss" wrote:
Charles Talleyrand wrote:
I do know that an A-1 Skyraider could buddy refuel, but I don't know
when this was developed.

There is something I don't understand though. *I cannot imagine an A-1
offloading more than 8,000 pounds of fuel (wild guess based on gross
and empty weight). *How much fuel did a jet of that era use. *It
doesn't seem productive to me, so I figure I must be missing
something.

In the 80s and 90s, 2,000# was a standard give to a single airplane
(F-4, A-6, A-7...) in many cases, and a full-cycle A-6 tanker had about
10K total to give. *Give 4K to a pair of F-4s off the cat and save 6
for the recovery. *Might get a bit more by consolidating from the
offgoing tanker.

Can you tell me more? How much would 2000# really help? An f-4 holds
12000# of internal fuel and 20000# total with three drop tanks.

-Still learning
-Charles

Charles Talleyrand wrote:
On Jun 3, 11:05 pm, "John Weiss" wrote:
Charles Talleyrand wrote:
I do know that an A-1 Skyraider could buddy refuel, but I don't know
when this was developed.
There is something I don't understand though. I cannot imagine an A-1
offloading more than 8,000 pounds of fuel (wild guess based on gross
and empty weight). How much fuel did a jet of that era use. It
doesn't seem productive to me, so I figure I must be missing
something.
In the 80s and 90s, 2,000# was a standard give to a single airplane
(F-4, A-6, A-7...) in many cases, and a full-cycle A-6 tanker had about
10K total to give. Give 4K to a pair of F-4s off the cat and save 6
for the recovery. Might get a bit more by consolidating from the
offgoing tanker.

Can you tell me more? How much would 2000# really help? An f-4 holds
12000# of internal fuel and 20000# total with three drop tanks.

-Still learning
-Charles

The buddy refuel was to top off an aircraft that was cat launched.
That way the receiving aircraft could launch with more ordnance and
replace the fuel used during launch.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Keith Willshaw wrote:


"guy" wrote in message
...
On 3 June, 22:01, Peter Twydell wrote:


Did they not develop a system to refuel Tiger Force Lancasters/
Lincolns for the assault on Japan?

Guy

Yes. In January 1944 three different designs had been prepared, the
third of which was adopted. In this the hose-drum and equipment was
placed towards the front of the aircraft and the fuel supply consisted
of two 640 imperial gallon (2,880 litres) tanks in the bomb bay.

50 sets of equipment were ordered for development and training. It was
then intended to convert a total of 500 tanker and receiver aircraft to
mount the long-range operations.

Trials for the Tiger Force operation were carried out with the prototype
Lancaster tanker PB.972 and receiver ND.648, using the looped hose
system. It was found that refuelling could be carried out at an
indicated airspeed of 160 mph at any reasonable altitude, over or in
cloud and at night, there being no difficulty in illuminating the
receiver's hauling cable.

Then the Americans went and dropped a couple of really big bombs.

Keith

Come on, Keith, those bombs weren't all that big. The Brits had
Grand Slam and Tallboy bombs. Surely you wouldn't begrudge the U.S.
helping the Japanese with urban renewal, would you? Besides, those two
bombs provided Japan with some really nice fireworks to help celebrate
the end of the war.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired