KC-135 down, another damaged

DropTank said:
Good point.
Not sure if the KC-10's had the strengthened engine mounts.

Might be time to fast track Jet Zero with tanks
(yeah, I know, It'll never happen)
Click to expand...
The Air Force threw a surprising amount of money at Jet Zero. The AF is pretty risk averse at this point. They thought the KC-46 was going to be a painless acquisition. It would have if they just put a guy in the back.
 
Pilot Fighter said:
The Air Force threw a surprising amount of money at Jet Zero. The AF is pretty risk averse at this point. They thought the KC-46 was going to be a painless acquisition. It would have if they just put a guy in the back.
Click to expand...

Why they don't donate a few KC10 CF6's (TF whatevers, I know) to jump start their prototype.

But there I go again, thinking logically.
 
MikeD said:
Quite likely parachutes wouldn’t have made a difference in this case, if severe damage was taken and the aircraft departed from control.
Click to expand...

Oh for sure, I just mean from the perspective of not being in an ejection seat equipped aircraft. Though obviously that isn't always a viable option in a catastrophic midair.
 
///AMG said:
Oh for sure, I just mean from the perspective of not being in an ejection seat equipped aircraft. Though obviously that isn't always a viable option in a catastrophic midair.
Click to expand...
Also it’s not like punching out guarantees survival either. See the Profane 12 mishap with Sumo 41 off of Japan a few years back.

www.popularmechanics.com

U.S. Marines Say a Moment's Confusion Caused the Fatal 2018 Air Collision

The report also described the squadron as having "a command climate of general unprofessionalism and misconduct."
www.popularmechanics.com www.popularmechanics.com
 
///AMG said:
Oh for sure, I just mean from the perspective of not being in an ejection seat equipped aircraft. Though obviously that isn't always a viable option in a catastrophic midair.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree. I was just saying that remembering back when -135s did have parachutes onboard, they weren’t easily accessible. The flight crews never flew with them on, the chutes were on hangars in the middle of the aircraft. The crew would have to go to the middle of the plane to don them, then would have to go forward to the lower entry hatch where they would pull a lever that would drop this large metal windbreak that would bust the entry door open and act as both a wind blocker and a kind of a slide for the individual crewmembers to slide down into the airstream and hopefully away from the jet. This is all to say, that bailout was controlled bailout-only for the tanker toads, not in any way uncontrolled.

Original design for the parachutes onboard was for the toads to use after giving away their fuel following an alert nuke launch, if they had nowhere they could get to.
 
MikeD said:
I definitely agree. I was just saying that remembering back when -135s did have parachutes onboard, they weren’t easily accessible. The flight crews never flew with them on, the chutes were on hangars in the middle of the aircraft. The crew would have to go to the middle of the plane to don them, then would have to go forward to the lower entry hatch where they would pull a lever that would drop this large metal windbreak that would bust the entry door open and act as both a wind blocker and a kind of a slide for the individual crewmembers to slide down into the airstream and hopefully away from the jet. This is all to say, that bailout was controlled bailout-only for the tanker toads, not in any way uncontrolled.

Original design for the parachutes onboard was for the toads to use after giving away their fuel following an alert nuke launch, if they had nowhere they could get to.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was gonna guess the intent was specifically for fuel starvation, or no runways or highways suitable for landing remaining.
 
Wardogg said:
Also it’s not like punching out guarantees survival either. See the Profane 12 mishap with Sumo 41 off of Japan a few years back.

www.popularmechanics.com

U.S. Marines Say a Moment's Confusion Caused the Fatal 2018 Air Collision

The report also described the squadron as having "a command climate of general unprofessionalism and misconduct."
www.popularmechanics.com www.popularmechanics.com
Click to expand...

I very much remember that one. Longer ago than I thought it was. One of many examples of ejecting into a bad situation will kill you. Also just a very bad situation. The MAWTS-1 tanker mishap in socal was a pure miracle (I mean other than the fact that it happened in the first place). If you remember that one as well. KC-130 v F-35A. Some incredible airmanship from the Herk crew.
 
///AMG said:
I very much remember that one. Longer ago than I thought it was. One of many examples of ejecting into a bad situation will kill you. Also just a very bad situation. The MAWTS-1 tanker mishap in socal was a pure miracle (I mean other than the fact that it happened in the first place). If you remember that one as well. KC-130 v F-35A. Some incredible airmanship from the Herk crew.
Click to expand...
All too well. Pilots earned the Distinguished Flying Cross for their trouble on that one.
 
MikeD said:
I definitely agree. I was just saying that remembering back when -135s did have parachutes onboard, they weren’t easily accessible. The flight crews never flew with them on, the chutes were on hangars in the middle of the aircraft. The crew would have to go to the middle of the plane to don them, then would have to go forward to the lower entry hatch where they would pull a lever that would drop this large metal windbreak that would bust the entry door open and act as both a wind blocker and a kind of a slide for the individual crewmembers to slide down into the airstream and hopefully away from the jet. This is all to say, that bailout was controlled bailout-only for the tanker toads, not in any way uncontrolled.

Original design for the parachutes onboard was for the toads to use after giving away their fuel following an alert nuke launch, if they had nowhere they could get to.
Click to expand...

Part of the response is emotional, thinking that a futile effort to egress with a chute is better than the emotional torture of just riding it down.

My previous question about whether 135’s got their chutes back wasn’t a veiled criticism, I was trying to translate the press release that “rescue efforts” were underway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top