Another In Flight Refueling F-14

[Bones]

This time I plugged for 1 minute and 7 seconds, took on about 1000 lbs of gas!

Then case I



v6,
boNes

[Grifter]

Nice job! It's not easy in the 14. I find it a bit easier in the 18. One thing I would suggest is try to make your movements a bit smoother, if you can. You seem to be stabbing at the basket a bit. Try to find the sweet spot when you're on so as not to push through or fall out of the basket, which is super hard and take lots of practice.

[Bones]

Thanks, I'll try again. BTW when using the basket to refuel IRL, they would have to plug into the basket then push it further to give a kink in the hose in order for the fuel to flow. Some weird anomaly but what was needed.

v6,
boNes

[Grifter]

Yeah I’ve seen the videos of that and it’s super weird, and therefore totally Tomcat!

[Bones]

All the Navy aircraft have to do it.

v6,
boNes

[Grifter]

Really? I thought it was in the F-14 that had to do that.

EDIT: just watched several super Hornet vids and they don’t put a kink in the hose. Maybe older Navy aircraft?

[Bones]

Really? I thought it was in the F-14 that had to do that.

EDIT: just watched several super Hornet vids and they don’t put a kink in the hose. Maybe older Navy aircraft?

You know, you got me thinking and so I double checked and the answer is:

It is ALL Navy aircraft, old and new.

But the reason why you saw Super Hornets doing it without a kink is this: You only have to put in the kink if you are refueling from a KC-135. Not necessary on a KS-3, KC-130, KA-6D etc. The reason is because the KC-135 has the boom to which they have to install a basket for the Navy. This added attachment is not very compatible with the boom and so to get the fuel to flow, you have to kink the hose. On the plus side, the KC-135 does have a high fuel flow so you get alot of gas fast.

Naval Aviators call the basket on the KC-135 the Iron Maiden. This is because that thing can do some damage. When tanking from anyone else, the hose is long, you have alot of space and time to maneuver, and hose flexibility. With the KC-135, the hose is only 10 feet long or so, and attached to a non-flexible boom, that is also driven by a boom operator who may read what you're doing wrong and steer the boom away from your anticipated movement. This can cause the basket to slap the nose of the aircraft. I've seen and heard of times when the basket whacked the canopy and shattered it, or was ripped off of the hose and the aircraft had to land on the boat with its probe out and basket attached. I have a video of VF-103's Tomcat returning to the boat with the basket attached. As a joke they left the basket in the pilot's ready room seat for him (scroll to 2:33):



But worse is having the basket or aircraft parts rip off and go down the right air intake killing the engine. In the Hornet, the AOA probe is on the right side of the nose so if the basket whacks it and worse gets ripped off and both go down the right air intake, that's really bad. The Hornet right engine controls hydraulics that support the flight controls so now you are going back to the boat with one engine with limited use of the flight controls and no AOA information (and we know how important AOA is in carrier traps!).

I love Naval Aviation!

https://sofrep.com/fightersweep/why-nav ... he-kc-135/

v6,
boNes

[Bones]

Oh, and BTW, although the Navy pilot who wrote the article said otherwise, there is a reason why Navy fighters use the probe/basket while USAF fighters sue the port/boom.

The boom on the USAF tankers retract, but not completely into the fuselage. The end of the boom with the vanes on it still do stick out a bit. For USAf jets landing on a nice long runway, they have enough clearance between the runway and the boom to make a gentle/controlled touchdown without damage to the boom or aircraft.

Not so in the Navy.

If you had the tip of the boom sticking out from your KS-3 or KA-A6D or even the F/A-18E/F tankers during a carrier landing, it's going get damsged or worse whacked off with the resultant compression of the landing gear lowering the fuselage in a slamming carrier trap. Or, the boom can get caught in the wires. This can damage or destroy the coom, the aircraft, the aircrew, other equipment and aircraft and personnel on the deck, and screw up recovering other aircraft where there is no airfield in range for recovery.

In addition to that, with space at a premium on the boat, the boom would not be a good idea.

So, like it or not, Navy aircraft have to use the probe and basket to refuel. On an interesting note, a KC-135 with the hose and basket attached to the boom makes that refueler only usable by Navy aircraft even though it's a USAF plane. The basket has to be attached before takeoff and will remain on there until the tanker lands because, hey, let's face it, no one wants to climb out on the boom to remove the basket at 36,000 ft just so the USAF planes can use it for fuel.

v6,
boNes

[Grifter]

great explanation, Bones! Thanks. I’ll watch the vid when I get home from work. Why doesn’t the chair force use the basket then? It would universalize the process across the services? Perhaps the boom is easier with the larger bomber craft?

[Bones]

Yes, the boom system requires a bigger aircraft such as the KC-135 to be able to house it and the mechanics of it. This came about because of the early days of the Cold War. Back in those days, the importance of the USAF lay mainly with the strategic bombers, particularly the B-52s. We had a ton of them for obvious reasons and so they needed to be able to be refueled in the air, and quickly. The boom gave a higher flow rate than the basket did, and the larger KC-135 could carry more gas to give at that higher rate. However, the B-52s being so large could not maneuver as easily as a fighter, and so getting a probe into the basket would not work for a B-52 or another large aircraft. The boom could also be driven by a boom operator to make it easier for the B-52. So, the boom design was chosen and stuck even today with today's USAF fighters, bombers, and Warthog.

v6,
boNes

[Grifter]

Hey not to hijack this post, but did you seee the unveiling of the new stealth bomber- B-21 Raider. I think it’s still just on the drawing board, although I’ve seen pics of it in a hangar. Not sure if that’s just a. Lock up or if it’s filully operational. Its outward design is like the B-2 Spirit.

[Xpendable]

Its not just a mockup. They actually built it. Supposedly it starts flight testing this year. Production run has not started yet.

[Grifter]

The flight tests should be interesting.