KC-10 Extender Retired to the Air Mobility Command museum

[sandiego89]

Whatever happened to the USAF developing a new tanker? Wasn't Boeing in line to get the contract to build this new tanker?

As Phil indicated, the KC-46 program is delivering tankers to the USAF, but has been beset by delays, cost over-runs and problems, most troubling being the remote vision system which is still not ready. The system has problems in certain low light situations, and after much litigation is being ripped out and totally replaced and fingers are crossed it might work. Was a high risk promise that was promised to be better than the human eyeball which had worked perfectly well on boom equipped tankers for some 70 years- a total travesty.

The next round of tanker buys was scheduled to start soon as a nearly off the shelf derivative and may lead to a larger tanker, perhaps giving Airbus a better chance (they won, then lost the program that resulted in the KC-46), or the Air Force might change their mind again....

[CAPFlyer]

The Air Force has said they are likely scrapping any plans of a KC-Y competition because there's just not a need for it in the current operational climate.

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/04/lac ... dall-says/

As for the KC-46, I honestly think the USAF should be footing the bill for the vision system (which they aren't - all but a couple of the overruns are 100% on Boeing). It was the USAF that didn't want to use the KC-767's VR system which has been working just fine for the last decade plus. Boeing wanted to offer an updated KC-767 with an updated flight deck, the new FBW boom (that is being retrofitted on the KC-767) and the VR-based remote boom system. But the USAF was "concerned" about using a headset as being "too cumbersome and nausea inducing"...