Military Review
Sign in Sign up

Air refueling, KC-135 Stratotanker

37





























































































































































































Military Reviewin Yandex News
Military Reviewin Google News
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nayhas
    Nayhas 8 October 2013 08: 57
    +5
    Thanks to an unknown author for a good selection. As far as I understand the topic about the KC-135 Stratotanker whose glorious age ends. 56 years of service is a long time. Going to replace the KC-46 will probably serve no less.
    Unfortunately, despite the vast extent of Russia, our pilots have practically no experience of refueling in the air. Rather, the experience is mainly experienced by pilots flying strategic bombers and MiG-31. According to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation in 2012. "tankers Il-78 and Il-78M carried out about 380 air refueling, while transferring over 5 thousand tons of fuel." And the Americans for 2012. In Afghanistan alone, 67020 air refueling operations were carried out while transferring 444920 tons of fuel ...
    380 refueling at the fleet of 21 cars, i.e. less than 20 refueling per plane per YEAR! And considering that sometimes more than one aircraft is refueling in one flight, it becomes completely sad ...
    1. Professor
      Professor 8 October 2013 09: 15
      +5
      Personally, I was impressed by the nomenclature of refueling aircraft. It seems that among the bourgeoisie, any maize and any pilot are able to refuel in the air.
      1. svp67
        svp67 8 October 2013 09: 19
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        Personally, I was impressed by the nomenclature of refueling aircraft. It seems that among the bourgeoisie, any maize and any pilot are able to refuel in the air.

        And this is one of the conditions for accepting the aircraft into service in NATO, as it facilitates the rapid transfer of aircraft from one theater of operations to another. So on the account of the "maize" I agree, but on the account of the pilots, no, this skill is still taught and not every pilot "has it from birth ..."
        1. Professor
          Professor 8 October 2013 09: 27
          +8
          But the refueling of helicopters and tiltrotors is generally amazing.







          1. svp67
            svp67 8 October 2013 10: 05
            -2
            Quote: Professor
            generally amazing.

            Than? I think that at the moment almost everyone can hit them, and first of all the "barrel", the rest will fall by themselves ...
            1. Professor
              Professor 8 October 2013 10: 07
              +5
              Quote: svp67
              Than? I think that at the moment almost everyone can hit them, and first of all the "barrel", the rest will fall by themselves ...

              The impression of refueling in the air of rotorcraft is striking. This is a dangerous and even very dangerous business.
              1. svp67
                svp67 8 October 2013 10: 17
                0
                Quote: Professor
                The impression of refueling in the air of rotorcraft is striking. This is a dangerous and even very dangerous business.
                Well, for that they paid money, for that they are PROFESSIONALS
                1. Professor
                  Professor 8 October 2013 11: 39
                  0
                  Quote: svp67
                  Well, for that they paid money, for that they are PROFESSIONALS

                  Russian pilots also have been studying this for a long time and are not flying for thanks.
            2. Nayhas
              Nayhas 8 October 2013 10: 18
              +2
              Quote: svp67
              I think that at the moment almost everyone can hit them, and first of all "barrel", the rest will fall by themselves ...

              Well, actually, refueling is carried out in a safe area, no one will produce it over enemy territory.
              1. svp67
                svp67 8 October 2013 10: 23
                -2
                Quote: Nayhas
                Well, actually, refueling is carried out in a safe area, no one will produce it over enemy territory.

                Well, THIS IS EXACTLY THIS and SHOULD BE USED. Such areas, especially when flying from the American continent, are known, and therefore it is necessary to prepare "SUMMERS" for them there. What kind? Let our military and designers think, for example, what would not hurt to equip our nuclear submarines or "peaceful" trawlers ...
          2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Aryan
      Aryan 8 October 2013 12: 03
      +1
      and I was nailed by a photo where a night refueling over a big city ...
      what are they? And if ARDSTER comes and then riots and happens?
      It wouldn’t be precipitating then ... fool
      1. 0255
        0255 8 October 2013 14: 16
        +3
        Quote: Aryan
        and I was nailed by a photo where a night refueling over a big city ...
        what are they? And if ARDSTER comes and then riots and happens?
        It wouldn’t be precipitating then ... fool

        the American government will declare such an accident a new terrorist attack on the part of al-Qaeda, they will say that some Arab terrorist who refused to study landing at the flight school, hijacked the plane and blew it up over the city. Or he magically made his way into the plane with a martyr's belt and with a cry "Allah-akbar" blew himself up along with the unfortunate tanker wassat
    3. 0255
      0255 8 October 2013 12: 20
      0
      And the Americans for 2012. only in Afghanistan they performed 67020 refueling in the air while transmitting 444920 tons of fuel ...

      here it is, one of the true causes of the Iraq war in 2003 and pressure on Iran since 1979, when they overthrew the Shah (((
  2. Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 8 October 2013 09: 08
    +2
    It seems that only democrats can do this ...
    1. FunkschNNX
      FunkschNNX 8 October 2013 09: 59
      +5
      It seems that every pilot knows how to do it. Which is probably true.
      1. svp67
        svp67 8 October 2013 10: 30
        +2
        Quote: Фкенщь13
        It seems that every pilot knows how to do it. Which is probably true.

        Yeah, he just sat down at the helm and already has ... No, not all, but many ...
    2. nazgul-ishe
      nazgul-ishe 8 October 2013 15: 24
      -1
      They just do it better and cheaper.
  3. Sirozha
    Sirozha 8 October 2013 09: 16
    0
    Beautiful!
    Still interesting, to a comrade on a white plane, does the cowboy hat in the cockpit not interfere? :)
    1. svp67
      svp67 8 October 2013 10: 47
      0
      Quote: Sirozha
      Still interesting, to a comrade on a white plane, does the cowboy hat in the cockpit not interfere? :)
      So it is given before such a flight, in addition to the "diapers", in which case, it can be used for an indirect purpose ...
  4. MAG
    MAG 8 October 2013 09: 30
    0
    A question for those who know why we do not have a hard trunk? and the speed of refueling them 1 against our 2 on the IL-76?
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 8 October 2013 10: 16
      +5
      Quote: MAG
      A question for those who know why we do not have a hard trunk? and the speed of refueling them 1 against our 2 on the IL-76?

      This is called a fuel rod. Fill through it faster and safer, why domestic designers could not make an analogue is not clear. Both the IL-78 and the KC-135 have three refueling points, but we have all three hose cones, while the adversary has a hose cone installed only on the wing refueling points. The photo also shows that the fuel receivers on planes are different, for marine aviation the fuel receiver is in the form of a retractable rod, for the Air Force, the fuel receiver is in the form of a neck where the rod tip is inserted. This is due to the fact that marine aviation does not have air tankers with a fuel boom, only a hose cone.
  5. Nuar
    Nuar 8 October 2013 11: 35
    -2
    am
    But I'm interested in - where are the letters in the article?

    About problems in training, about disasters?
    1. svp67
      svp67 8 October 2013 11: 39
      +1
      Quote: Nuar
      About problems in training, about disasters?
      So the article and the photo should show the GREATNESS of the US Air Force and not their problems ... And this (the crash of the tanker plane) they will try to forget faster ...

    2. Professor
      Professor 8 October 2013 11: 41
      0
      Quote: Nuar
      But I'm interested in - where are the letters in the article?

      About problems in training, about disasters?

      This is not an article, but a photo compilation posted in the appropriate section of the site.
      1. svp67
        svp67 8 October 2013 12: 45
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        This is not an article, but a photo selection

        What does not prevent her, coupled with some comments about the skill of American pilots, to influence the "fragile minds" ... "Look, we are so cool, where are you, gray-footed rednecks ..." So, these are beautiful photos, but we also know how our pilots are very good professionals ...



        1. svp67
          svp67 8 October 2013 12: 53
          0
          _____________________
        2. svp67
          svp67 8 October 2013 12: 54
          0
          _________________
        3. svp67
          svp67 8 October 2013 12: 59
          0
          ___________________
        4. svp67
          svp67 8 October 2013 13: 00
          +1
          ___________________
        5. Professor
          Professor 8 October 2013 13: 31
          0
          Quote: svp67
          So, these are beautiful photos, but our pilots can do the same and our pilots are very good professionals ...

          ... professionals, only less bourgeois fly, and as far as I know, helicopters do not refuel.

          PS
          There is a patent to replenish ammunition in the air.
          1. svp67
            svp67 8 October 2013 18: 45
            +1
            Quote: Professor
            .professionals
            Not wrong, but PROFESSIONALS.

            Quote: Professor
            only less bourgeois fly

            Nothing, I think everything will get better very soon, including thanks to the "underfunding" of the US army.

            Quote: Professor
            and as far as I know, helicopters do not refuel.

            Alas, yes so far, but they know how to do so ...

          2. bif
            bif 8 October 2013 20: 42
            +2
            Quote: Professor
            ... professionals, only less bourgeois fly

            The general use of refueling tanks is generally characteristic of the Western Air Force for a number of objective reasons: 1. Small capacity of internal tanks (if we compare the same type of aircraft with Russian) Example: Su-27 volume of internal tanks max / normal 9400 / 5240 kg, f-15 - 6103kg (therefore use external to 3's PTB and 2's conformal tanks), 2. more importantly, western birds have to fly far to sow democracy.
            So it is not a matter of professionalism, but of necessity and opportunity.
            And the capabilities of the Russian Air Force are growing, but Western military budgets are shallowing ... and not only Western ones - "" Our security assistance to Israel, our closest ally in the Middle East, is being postponed, "said the head of the US Foreign Office. the year that began on October 2014, the United States planned to provide military aid to Israel in the amount of about $ 1 billion ... "http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/news/view/3,1/
            1. Professor
              Professor 8 October 2013 20: 53
              0
              Quote: bif
              1. small capacity of internal tanks

              To take more weapons.

              Quote: bif
              Our security assistance to Israel, our closest ally in the Middle East, has been postponed, "said the head of the US Foreign Office. In fiscal 2014, which began October 1, the United States planned to provide military assistance to Israel in the amount of about $ 3,1 billion ... "http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/news/view/84274/

              More precisely, it is delayed, and only for purely technical reasons, paralysis of power in the United States. In general, it would be better if they did not allocate this help at all - Israel would only benefit from this.
              1. Nuar
                Nuar 8 October 2013 22: 32
                0
                svp67, bif - now thank you. It already looks like an article.

                (Of course I would also like about argentines - how they, in the opinion of the small-shavens, had problems with refueling in 1982. and more about Italians, as they in 91st during the "desert storm" and could not master this maneuver. well, about other countries / peoples ... but all these are dreams, sir)

                Quote: Professor
                This is not an article, but a photo selection
                exactly. but I would like to.

                Yes, and I'm looking for pictures in "Google pictures", for this I log into the "Observer" broke. tongue
              2. bif
                bif 9 October 2013 03: 00
                0
                Quote: Professor
                More precisely, it is delayed and only for purely technical reasons, paralysis of power in the USA

                Ну delayed(for an unknown amount of time) \ pauses \ decreases .... the meaning is the same - there is NO money and it is not clear when it will be.
                On technical reasons, here I completely agree with you when the country is bankrupt, so to speak, not to fat.
                Paralysis of power in the USA, this is far from related to financing of Israel, but paralysis relations with Israel are just direct. Obama "hates" Netinyahu and this affects foreign policy.
                Quote: Professor
                In general, it would be better if they did not allocate this help at all - Israel would only benefit from this.

                The residents of Israel would have won, that's for sure, because to constantly attack and fight with neighbors will not be possible without funds in the military budget.
                Article for 2012 "... the approved budget of Israel was 91 billion US dollars, and the Moscow budget this year has already exceeded 50 billion. Hence the conclusion that the budget of the State of Israel is only equal to two budgets of Moscow? If we talk about the population, then in Israel is home to 7,5 million people, and in Moscow, according to the latest census - 10,3 million. " "Israel's military budget for 2012 is about $ 13 billion. Of this, $ 3 billion is subsidized by the United States." "The security structures are the largest part of the budget, its lion's share goes to the Israeli Defense Ministry as always ... The budget of the Israeli security forces is not limited to these amounts. There are also budgets of the Israeli intelligence department" MOSADA " Head of the Knesset. The budget of the border guards with the name - "MAGAV police" is included in the budget of the Ministry of Internal Security "http://www.pro-israel.ru/byudget-israelya.html
                The bottom line is simple: "At the same time, according to analyst Clyde Mark, the Israeli economy is not self-sufficient and depends on subsidies and aid from abroad, primarily from the United States." according to the wiki.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 9 October 2013 09: 20
                  0
                  Quote: bif
                  Well, it is delayed (for an unknown amount of time) \ is suspended \ is reduced .... the meaning is the same - there is NO money and it is not clear when it will be.

                  You are not up to date. Money allocated and did not arrive purely for technical reasons, a federal booth. The Senate will agree with Obama and the next day there will be money.

                  Quote: bif
                  The bottom line is simple: "At the same time, according to analyst Clyde Mark, the Israeli economy is not self-sufficient and depends on subsidies and aid from abroad, primarily from the United States." according to the wiki.

                  Do not believe the wiki delirium. How many percent of GDP is foreign economic assistance?
                  GDP (purchasing power parity): $ 252.8 billion (2012 est.)
  6. 0255
    0255 8 October 2013 12: 31
    +3
    Refueling Tu-16 is cooler))) No one except Tupolev thought of that)))
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. parij777
    parij777 8 October 2013 13: 24
    0
    http://rencontres.ru
    Photos of beautiful girls 18 Moscow
    http://volkswagen7.cwahi.net/volks58
    Beautiful online girl runetka shannen loves Fantasy, softcore and socializing
    http://alika.atwebpages.com
    Intim leisure Moscow region
    http://lovekiss.cwahi.net
    Beautiful naked body of women photo Moscow
  9. spirit
    spirit 8 October 2013 13: 52
    0
    Ltd! even a black widow was dug up good
  10. nazgul-ishe
    nazgul-ishe 8 October 2013 15: 30
    +3
    Quote: Professor
    ... professionals, only less bourgeois fly

    And the Stars of Heroes get for landing on the deck.
  11. lpd1
    lpd1 8 October 2013 16: 55
    0
    Good selection.
    1. nazgul-ishe
      nazgul-ishe 8 October 2013 23: 15
      0
      The selection is very good, we would like that.