My first guess would be a gross weight concern. Make it too heavy and you might as well go with a KC-10 sized airplane, because it'll be limited on what airfields it can use. Strictly a guess though.
KC-135 Stratotanker
Length: 136 feet, 3 inches
Cabin Width: 12 feet
Maximum Transfer Fuel Load: 200,000 pounds
KC-46A Tanker
Length: 165 feet, 6 inches
Cabin Width: 15 feet 6 inches
Maximum Transfer Fuel Load: 207,672 pounds
KC-10 Extender
Length: 181 feet, 7 inches
Cabin Width: 18 ft 2 in
Maximum Fuel Load: 356,000 pounds
Question: Why is the KC-46A being designed to carry only slightly more fuel than the KC-135R? It is a larger airframe, I was expecting the fuel load to be somewhere more in the middle of the KC-135 and the KC-10.
My first guess would be a gross weight concern. Make it too heavy and you might as well go with a KC-10 sized airplane, because it'll be limited on what airfields it can use. Strictly a guess though.
Also, the KC-46 is going to burn less fuel flying the mission than the KC-135R
Also has more pallet and passenger capacity.
MTOW is nearly 100,000 lbs more than KC-135.
"We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008
It's got some get-up-and-go, Jimmy.
About 50% more combined thrust KC46's 2 engines vs. KC135's 4 engines.
That Pratt's a monster.
"We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008
^^ 62,000 ea.
"We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Share this thread with friends: