Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 47 of 47

Thread: Boeing tanker won?

  1. #46
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Chogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Apr 09
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,648
    I freely admit to being an irrational fan-boy when it comes to Boeing, and want to see a fleet of new Boeing tankers purely for the sake of giving business to a respected and honored U.S. contractor. But no doubt either company could produce a superb tanker.

    One issue: The latest transports have higher than ever amounts of composite structural components. These are fine for civilian transport use, but I wonder how maintainable they would be for the military. Aluminum is simple - rivet a patch on it. But ding a composite surface (or being forced to deal with battle damage) and you'll need an entirely new set of skills. Not impossible, but a bit more challenging.

    I also believe Airbus would have to re-write some of the flight control laws they normally build into their designs, as I don't think they'd be acceptable to military operators as they currently exist.

  2. #47
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by Chogy View Post
    One issue: The latest transports have higher than ever amounts of composite structural components. These are fine for civilian transport use, but I wonder how maintainable they would be for the military. Aluminum is simple - rivet a patch on it. But ding a composite surface (or being forced to deal with battle damage) and you'll need an entirely new set of skills. Not impossible, but a bit more challenging.
    Funny you should mention this...

    I just finished reading an article (Air International, which I then promply lost on the subway :( ) about this. Apparently, both Airbus and Boeing are reviewing the materials used for their next generation airliners (10-15 years time), specifically replacements for B737-class. Since these airliners land/takeoff a lot more times than their bigger cousins, they are more vulnerable to all the minor dings, nudges and touches of a civilian airport. A dented metal skin can even be ignored (apprently), and a small hole easily fixed. The same doesn't happen in a composite skin. So the builders are taking hard looks at new aluminium-lithium aloys...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. C-17 Tanker?
    By Stitch in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 17 Feb 11,, 01:07
  2. Tanker Badge
    By bigross86 in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27 Mar 10,, 17:10
  3. How well does this depict real tanker training?
    By Proyas in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01 Apr 09,, 01:31
  4. Gilligan's Island, Tanker Style!
    By Lunatock in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26 Jul 07,, 00:36
  5. FAA Certification Of KC-767 Tanker Delayed
    By wabpilot in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24 May 07,, 01:42

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •