KC-10 tanker

Is the KC-767 / KC-46 expected to fill in for the KC-10? Are there any plans to replace the KC-10 with the A330 MRTT / KC-45, KC-777, or even the 747 / KC-33?
 
Grey Havoc said:
They should have transferred at least some of them to the Air National Guard.
Click to expand...
There were already aircraft operated by the Reserve but retiring them to the Guard doesn't solve any funding issues and just burdens the Guard with a type that is almost out of commercial service and has a nearly non existent maintenance supply line.
Christopher Wang said:
Is the KC-767 / KC-46 expected to fill in for the KC-10? Are there any plans to replace the KC-10 with the A330 MRTT / KC-45, KC-777, or even the 747 / KC-33?
Click to expand...
Yes. Not likely to see a new large tanker come along. The next tanker is programmed to be the KC-Y, bridging tanker, which will almost certainly be more KC-46s but the USAF wants to move along to KC-Z as part of NGAS as soon as they can.

https://theaviationist.com/2024/05/13/skunk-works-release-new-kc-z-stealth-tanker-rendering/
While people may not like the retirement of the KC-10 it is the right thing to do for the USAF. Their budget simply doesn't stretch to operating three tankers and retiring a whole type saves so much more than retiring an equivalent number of KC-135s.
 
The KC-10 fleet was hard-worked for 40 years, plus there are no more civilian DC-10s left to share spares and alleviate the growing maintenace cost burden. Compared to the 800+ KC-135 fleet (which kinda self-sustain) 60 KC-10s is a tiny fleet.
 
Last edited:
Less than 10, and that’s including the three KDC-10s at Omega, four used as Air Tankers for forest fires, and the Orbis Flying Eye hospital. Certainly nothing in normal operation in the States since Fedex retired all of there’s, and are on track to retire the MD11 fleet by 2028.
 
I've completely forgotten that Omega operates two separate types of "KDC-10" tankers. Interesting to note they converted former JAL DC-10-40 N974VV into a tanker before acquiring the RNLAFs boom tankers.

Per Omega's FAQ https://www.omegaairrefueling.com/faqs/

KDC-10A
The KDC-10/MPTT tanker is a modified DC-10-40 with two modern Eaton 909E wing pods. On the KDC-10, one Eaton 909E wing pod assembly is located on each wing. Two aircraft may refuel simultaneously.
KDC-10B
The KDC-10 boom tankers are KDC-10-30 aircraft with the same boom as mounted on a USAF KC-10 except it is controlled through a Remote Aerial Refueling Operator station at the front of the aircraft and is equipped with a Load Alleviation System.
 
NMaude said:
I wonder how many of these retired KC-10As will be converted into Air Tankers to fight forest fires?
Click to expand...
None? Hopefully they are scooped up by military contractors...
It is probably easier to convert a MD-10/11 into fire tankers than de-mil a KC-10.
 
NMaude said:
I wonder how many of these retired KC-10As will be converted into Air Tankers to fight forest fires?
Click to expand...
Seems unlikely to me. They will initially be stored as Type 1000 which is essentially the highest level of storage, so near flyaway condition although I think pretty certain none will ever fly again, and I expect they will drop quickly to a lower level of storage.
 
Boeing recommends grounding the MD-11 after UPS crash. As the 11 is a modernized DC-10 at the base of USAF KC-10, I wonder if there are history of similar incidents or near call of that type.
 
TomcatViP said:
Boeing recommends grounding the MD-11 after UPS crash. As the 11 is a modernized DC-10 at the base of USAF KC-10, I wonder if there are history of similar incidents or near call of that type.
Click to expand...

None of the other MD-11 hull losses appear to have involved an engine falling off the wing. There was one DC-10 loss like that (American Airlines Flight 191) but not enough to say it was a trend or anything.
 
Fun little fact that is often forgotten: KC-10 could be aerial refueled, by their siblings and of course by KC-135s. They could receive fuel on top of giving it, how about that.
Does anybody have a picture of a KC-10 aerial refueling from another KC-10 ?
 
Archibald said:
Does anybody have a picture of a KC-10 aerial refueling from another KC-10 ?
Click to expand...
Picture and video:

Damocles.jpg


https://theaviationist.com/2015/05/26/kc-10-buddy-refueling-at-night/
 
The video/image looks so surreal ...... glad it was captured to be shared .....
 
I'm going with Morocco. Thw US has been training with them on a greater scale the last couple of years, and the Moroccans are beginning to get their new F-16 aircraft. Since F-16 is not known for their great endurance, and Africa being a very large place it certainly would make sense that Morocco would want air refueling capability.
That said Egypt has been savvy allies of the west for deccades now. With China rubbing elbows with them of recent days, making sweet deals would be a move I could see from the Egytains.
 
yasotay said:
I'm going with Morocco. Thw US has been training with them on a greater scale the last couple of years, and the Moroccans are beginning to get their new F-16 aircraft. Since F-16 is not known for their great endurance, and Africa being a very large place it certainly would make sense that Morocco would want air refueling capability.
That said Egypt has been savvy allies of the west for deccades now. With China rubbing elbows with them of recent days, making sweet deals would be a move I could see from the Egytains.
Click to expand...
We will just have to wait and see on that. Either way, those KC-10s are gonna be operating in the African Theater from that point on.
 
In the context of the War in Iran, giving KC-10 to Egypt would increase their deterrence against ballistic missiles attack from Iran. With long range tanker, Egypt would be able to retaliate and use its large fighter fleet to inflict punitive effects. Bringing Egypt in that position allows more chance for the Suez canal to remain open (the next stated target by Iran) keeping Europeans longer on the good side of the conflict and saving precious diesel stock for the US market.

On the contrary, Morocco doesn´t offer any strategic moment arm for the US. Morocco is stuck in a local conflict where strategic assets will just be wasted and opportunities irremediably lost. Unless they choose somehow to join an alliance against Iran (Houtis?).
 
yasotay said:
With China rubbing elbows with them of recent days, making sweet deals would be a move I could see from the Egytains.
Click to expand...
Is giving anyone now retired KC-10s a sweet deal? I expect it is a deal to spend large chunks of their own money supporting/maintaining an airframe no one else operates.
 
TomcatViP said:
In the context of the War in Iran, giving KC-10 to Egypt would increase their deterrence against ballistic missiles attack from Iran. With long range tanker, Egypt would be able to retaliate and use its large fighter fleet to inflict punitive effects. Bringing Egypt in that position allows more chance for the Suez canal to remain open (the next stated target by Iran) keeping Europeans longer on the good side of the conflict and saving precious diesel stock for the US market.

On the contrary, Morocco doesn´t offer any strategic moment arm for the US. Morocco is stuck in a local conflict where strategic assets will just be wasted and opportunities irremediably lost. Unless they choose somehow to join an alliance against Iran (Houtis?).
Click to expand...
The Polisario Front in Western Sahara?
 
yasotay said:
I'm going with Morocco. Thw US has been training with them on a greater scale the last couple of years, and the Moroccans are beginning to get their new F-16 aircraft. Since F-16 is not known for their great endurance, and Africa being a very large place it certainly would make sense that Morocco would want air refueling capability.
That said Egypt has been savvy allies of the west for deccades now. With China rubbing elbows with them of recent days, making sweet deals would be a move I could see from the Egytains.
Click to expand...
One of them, certainly. No other possibilities.

Algeria buys Russian. Tunisia doesn't have an air force which could use tankers, & Libya's too chaotic. Only leaves Egypt & Morocco.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom