Call it the cost of doing business around the boat. I would never begrudge those guys that gas that they are dumping, and this is coming from someone who flies an aircraft that has to shut down with a minimum of ten thousand pounds in the tanks.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
USN may add conformal fuel tanks to F/A-18E/F fleet
- Thread starter delta215
- Start date
Not all Air Wings do smart-tanking; in fact CSFTP had to highly recommend that the CVW try it so they know how to do it. It is discussed as part of C2X, but it comes at a risk that most CAG's don't want to take or don't like, especially as they are trying to get their blue water cert (COE) during C2X..
http://e2s2.ndia.org/schedule/Documents/2012 Abstracts/Breakout Sessions/14383.pdf
Interesting, especially the graph that breaks down fuel usage by TMS. Also interesting that my community of 16 airplanes makes that big of a dent.
Interesting, especially the graph that breaks down fuel usage by TMS. Also interesting that my community of 16 airplanes makes that big of a dent.
What I took away from that is if you bold something and make it red, it's automatically true.
We train to operate in places where that's not an option. And when it's not actual blue water ops taking place, obviously there is a bingo state beneath that notional tank state and we will bingo if necessary. But the middle of the ocean, 600nm from any field, is not the place to find out your airwing's tanking procedures need work.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Hasn't that rumor come out every year since the Hoov got retired?
Why would they do that? Current system seems to work well enough. Sounds like wishful thinking.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Let pull the KA-6 out of retirement.. Are there even any left in the boneyard? With the Prowler being phased out, it does probably free up a good chunk of spares.
What would an S-3 tanker's give amount be in lbs of gas? How does that compare w/ Buddy Stores or whatever we're doing now?
The more important question is... how much $$$ would it take to field, equip and maintain a fleet of S-3s? The answer is too much. Legacy airframes like that are O&M money pits. Someone did this cost/benefit calculus when they killed the S-3s in the first place. I doubt much has changed.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
True, but have they looked into the fact that the trap life on some of the rhinos are getting eat up by it..
TTLR don't burn much but engine cycles/times, but as airframes start getting trapped out, with the IOC for the F-35 nowhere on the horizon..
Example.. It may cost me more to keep my POS 99 F-250 running than my 2013 4Runner.. But if the $$$ dumped into the F-250 saves me from either running the 4Runner into the ground pulling all sorts of heavy trailers, or from buying a new truck..
TTLR don't burn much but engine cycles/times, but as airframes start getting trapped out, with the IOC for the F-35 nowhere on the horizon..
Example.. It may cost me more to keep my POS 99 F-250 running than my 2013 4Runner.. But if the $$$ dumped into the F-250 saves me from either running the 4Runner into the ground pulling all sorts of heavy trailers, or from buying a new truck..
^ you've oversimplified the case.
There are MANY inherent costs with "parking" an airplane. See NAS Whidbey/CVWP and the idea of "preservation"....
There are MANY inherent costs with "parking" an airplane. See NAS Whidbey/CVWP and the idea of "preservation"....