B2 bombers fly to Libya and are refueled 13 times without landing. I assume there’s some sort of logistical pattern that has these refueling planes available at the right place at the right time for the mission.
Do the refueling planes also get refueled in the air? How many of these refueling planes are there, and are they always flying around?
If memory serves, during the Cold war when we had bombers aloft 24/7, there were tankers aloft to keep the bombers topped off with fuel. The tankers would takeoff, refuel the bombers and then land to do it again.
My google-fu is failing me now, but I know I’ve seen a shot of a refueler refueling something while it itself was being refueled.
IIRC, during the Falklands War, Britain couldn’t get overflight rights nor use of airstrips in any other European country, and so needed a complicated pyramid of tankers refueling tankers in order to get their fighters to the island. It was something crazy like 19 tanker planes for each fighter mission.
B2 bombers can bomb parts of Libya at their maximum range without refueling (~6000 nm) , so I suspect any extra refueling is either for carrying heavier bombloads or for taking some sort of non-optimal route. My googling says it’s about 5 refuelings for a round trip from the CONUS.
That said, the refueling planes don’t necessarily have to keep pace with the bombers; they have a pretty long range, and there are bases along the way within range - Lajes in the Azores, RAF Mildenhall in England, Aviano and Sigonella in Italy, etc… which tankers could stage from in order to be ready to refuel planes in transit.
You’re thinking of Operation Black Buck, which were bomber missions out of Ascension Island. As far as I know, the only UK fighters in the area were Harriers, and they were carried there on the ships.
While the initial force of Sea Harriers were indeed carried on the Hermes and the Invincible, they were later joined by ~6 GR3 variants, who flew direct from England to Ascension Island, before then going on to the Hermes.
I was wondering which European countries there were between the UK and the South Atlantic. Actually 11 tankers to get a single Vulcan bomber to Port Stanley. The attacking Vulcan was refuelled four times on the outward journey and once on the return journey, using over 220,000 gallons of aviation fuel during the mission.
The tankers themselves had to be refueled
Harriers were flying from HMS Hermes and HMS Invincible.
I recently retired from the USAF Reserve, after spending 9 years as a KC-10 in-flight refueling technician (“boom operator”). It was an incredible job for an aviation nutcase such as myself; I’ve got dozens of unique videos, thousands of photos, and enough awesome memories to last a few lifetimes.
[ul]
[li]Considerable time is spent in the mission planning process between the tanker and receiver crews, figuring out where the optimum air refueling (AR) points will be, and figuring out the best location for the tanker(s) to stage from.[/li][li]All KC-10s and a small number of KC-135s are receiver-capable. The new KC-46 is also receiver-capable. I’ve done several long-distance deployment missions where we had a group of fighters that we were refueling, and we met with another tanker (or two) en-route that refueled us.[/li][li]There are 59 KC-10s, and around 400 KC-135s. 179 KC-46s are projected to be built in the future, once the prototypes finish flight testing and Boeing gets a production contract.[/li][li]There’s almost always several tankers airborne at any given moment. Several are on training flights to qualify new crewmembers, and maintain currency and proficiency of already-qualified crews. Others are flying in support of current operations. Others are supporting “other” missions, like cargo and aeromedical evacuation.[/li][/ul]
*** All numbers are open-source from the linked af.mil factsheets. All references are to US military tankers and operations. Several other countries do air refueling, but none on the same scale as the US.
Here’s an article on the recent raids to Libya that describes some of the logistics - Air Force refuelers enable B-2 strike against Daesh in Libya > Team McChord > Article Display
So, how much of the volume of a tanker is taken up by fuel? I haven’t been able to locate any interior shots of a takers cargo area (although I didn’t try very hard to do so).
Any why refuel a tanker rather than just “trade places” ?
Take a look at the Operation Black Buck link in post 6.
All the refueling aircraft came from the same place so there was no way to conveniently trade places. They all had to fly the same route from the same point of departure. Flying all of them the entire trip would have required more total fuel. By crossloading to fill up tankers going further they could turn back planes with enough to get home safely. The option was all of them flying partly full burning fuel the entire way.
The additional fuel tanks on the KC-10, KC-135, and KC-46 are under the cabin floor, in the areas that would normally be the baggage compartments in their civilian airliner counterparts. The cargo compartments of all three look, for the most part, like any other cargo plane’s cabin.
KC-10 cargo compartment, looking aft
KC-135 cargo compartment, looking forward
These photos do a pretty good job of illustrating the size difference between the -135 and the -10…
As far as “trading places” - there are a lot of mission planning factors that go into the decisions about which tanker(s) go “all the way”, and which ones meet the flight partway, give their gas, then either go back to their departure point or land somewhere else. I don’t know them all, and can’t openly discuss some, but some considerations would include essential cargo and/or passengers on certain tankers that are part of the unit being deployed, the region being overflown, where the nearest secure airfield is in relation to the flight path, and which tanker the refueling Mission Commander is on (one of the tanker pilots is always the refueling Mission Commander).
Were they censored?
[slight hijack]
(Hey, who knew that there would be an article about military refueling tankers so close to this article about one of China’s new attack aircraft?)
Lets assume that there are no carriers (left?) in the region and we are sending in aircraft that need to be refueled. What would protect the tankers attempting to refuel military aircraft from China’s new J-20 ‘Refueling Tanker Killer’?
[/slight hijack]
The thread title is giving me flashbacks of playing Top Gun on the NES.
I don’t get why the B2’s flew from Missouri in the first place? There’s probably a dozen B2’s on Diego Garcia which is a bit more than 4000 miles from Libya. They could have bombed them and been back before curfew.
[Side question]
Why the “KC” naming convention?
‘T’ was already taken?
