Wonderful story! We just received a bird from Travis for our collection!
@paulschab8152
Ай бұрын
Love me some Tri-holers. Will miss the KC-10. Taking a trip to the Air Force Museum to see her.
@MikeKoss
7 ай бұрын
Love this episode, Matt! So cool to see actual operations and not just static historical artifact (though those are cool too). Thx!
@terryjr1982
Ай бұрын
4,000 hrs in the KC-10 😊 best plane ever, what up Mandi!
@scotthennelly6946
7 ай бұрын
Matthew! What a cool episode... I was just thinking I hadn't seen a "on the loose" episode in awhile. The wait was worth it!
@ivanpli
7 ай бұрын
Fantastic video! I'm always amazed by professionalism of the US armed forces. Well done. Ivan
@christopherrutherford702
7 ай бұрын
Go Mandi!!! You are awesome!
@TheMkshort707
7 ай бұрын
Matt, small correction. 16:07 We can transfer approximately 8,000 GPM of fuel per minute
@museumofflight
7 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@jrmotorsports5532
7 ай бұрын
Very cool! So much great info/footage.
@AirZoo
7 ай бұрын
Amazing!
@BilGriffith
7 ай бұрын
Excellent program thanks
@CaptainRamius
7 ай бұрын
Just like the early days. Seems so long ago. All these folks joined the AF AFTER I retired.
@Spore1018
5 ай бұрын
"It probably doesn't have as many maintenance problems" if only they knew lol. The 46 is super temperamental.
@Monarch683
4 ай бұрын
As expected of a new platform. Granted, Boeing did drop the ball with its development, and they could've done better.
@Spore1018
4 ай бұрын
@Monarch683 New nearly a decade old now, based of an airframe from the 80s, with some changes that are extremely questionable coming from an aircraft MX perspective
@bobsled3000
7 ай бұрын
As a civilian aircraft mechanic, a 6-hour quick turn is insanely long lol
@cherifbar
5 ай бұрын
Is the KC10 based on the DC10-30 or 40?
@captaincarl2079
4 ай бұрын
30
@michellepowell1956
7 ай бұрын
uhhh a KC-10?
@MrDgwphotos
7 ай бұрын
Based on the Douglas DC-10 airliner.
@M80Ball
7 ай бұрын
The first of two aircraft that couldn’t replace the KC-135.
@81bird61
7 ай бұрын
Only reason the 135s arnt being retired is because of the amount thats out there. Its a crap plane but its easier to replace 59 vs 400-500 135s
@M80Ball
6 ай бұрын
@@81bird61you don’t know what you’re talking about.
@Spore1018
5 ай бұрын
@@M80BallHe's kinda right .Originally they were trying to replace the 135s with the new 46, but shifted to replacing the 10 later because of how much replacing all the 135s would be.
@captaincarl2079
4 ай бұрын
The 135 does not even come close to the capability of the KC-10. The 10 carries more gas, more cargo, can refuel inflight and does boom and drogue on the same mission. It was never meant to replace the 135 it was meant to augment it. When it came time to get rid of a tanker for the new KC46, the McDonnell Douglas product (Now owned by Boeing) of which there was only 59 of (along with a dwindling parts supply) was an easy target as opposed to 400 something 135's over multiple states. I was a tanker planner and flew on the 10 and on many occasions we literally had to send -10's to 135 bases to do certain missions since the 135's didn't have the legs and we'd have to launch 2-3 of them to do the job of 1 KC-10.
Пікірлер: 28