August 16, 2006 at 2:51 am
Saw the KC-767 roadshow today. Huge Boeing 18 Wheeler setup, with an indoor cockpit display and refuel sim.
Talked to the guy there for a while. Not much I didn’t already know but nice to see some mock up stuff and nice cutaway models showing various configs.
Even though it is a dump truck ( 767-200 sizeup ) it will use some 777 tech ( cockpit ) just like the 767-400 has a 777 like cockpit. This of course will help training a small tad as if ever in the furture KC-10 is replaced by a KC-777, the cockpit tech will be near same-same. This same approach will be handy if ever the E-10 ( also 767 body ) ever revives.
According to this guy there is still more time than you hear about of the 767 line being available. If the deal is delayed even more and streches a few years with no hard activity, the 767 airframe won’t be available. ( Where some… not all…. engineers say 787 is to much gumby to be a firm tanker …. leave that one to the real engineers I suppose ).
The Italian KC-767 pretty much works and is still doing some more testing. Far further along than any Airbus by any other name KC-30. ( Sorry the Aussie Airbus tanker is not up to spec of anything we would use )
Either way the cookie crumbles, I expect we will waste a lot of cash. These different airframes ( tanker and C4ISR ) bring more to the fight than all the funds we will waste on JSF. Boeing may almost own us and do stupid stuff along with our dumb ex USAF leaders which ran like roaches ( pun intended ) from the tanker fiasco. However, operationally, in the long haul, the 767 series airframe is the way to go. Including, which I forgot to mention to this puke, I think a 767 airframe with Wedgetail MESA/AESA like tech would be the way to go for an AWACs replacement yet still have E-10_like mission ability also.
The KC-767 roadshow will be at McDill tomorrow. Worth a look.