Boeing 737 Tanker...

[B777LR]

Instead of 2 wing mounted hoses, you could do like the french, and add a hose to the end of the boom  The wingspan is afterall not so great as a 767, so wing mounted and they might get a bit too close  

[elmayerle]

Just use a Boeing 737-900ER

Isnt the USAF also looking at possibly buying KC-737 and KC-777? Of course they are also looking at KC-767...

Actually, that'd be more like a "KT-43D" or some such since the 737 is already in USAF service as the T-43 and CT-43 (Ron Brown was killed in the crash of a CT-43).

For such a tanker version of a 737-800 or -900, I'd go with a centerline HDU with an option for wing-mounted pods, too.  They'd have to be out a ways to clear turbulence around the engines so I'm not sure  you'd want them on all the time.

[B777LR]

Cool tankers:

KC-380
KC-Concorde
KC-11
KC-17
KC-5
KC-350 XWB V.6.1
KCF-104 Starfueler
KC-727
KCV-22

[GTX]

A few years back there was a proposal for KC-17s for the RAAF - I will try to find the details.

Regards,

Greg

[Jennings]

Instead of 2 wing mounted hoses, you could do like the french, and add a hose to the end of the boom  The wingspan is afterall not so great as a 767, so wing mounted and they might get a bit too close

(putting on best American redneck accent):

Boy, that there basket attachment on the enduh that there Frenchie tanker boom was invented and made in AMERICA, boy.  Just like the resta that Frenchie airplane wuz...

[Jennings]

Okay, howzis?  One note - an HDU exiting under the aft fuselage the way I have it here wouldn't work.  The airplane would almost inevitably hit it on rotation.  You might be able to get away with something akin to that on the KC-10, where it's offset to one side and in a relatively small fairing though.  I was too lazy to draw that

J

[P1127]

Just use a Boeing 737-900ER

Isnt the USAF also looking at possibly buying KC-737 and KC-777? Of course they are also looking at KC-767...

Actually, that'd be more like a "KT-43D" or some such since the 737 is already in USAF service as the T-43 and CT-43 (Ron Brown was killed in the crash of a CT-43).

Surely KC-40, as the T-43 is first generation 737.

I still think a KC-32 would be cool (there was a proposal to plumb BA's 757s as emergency tankers for the RAF when they were ordered)

[Archangel]

Okay, howzis?  One note - an HDU exiting under the aft fuselage the way I have it here wouldn't work.  The airplane would almost inevitably hit it on rotation.  You might be able to get away with something akin to that on the KC-10, where it's offset to one side and in a relatively small fairing though.  I was too lazy to draw that

J

I like it.  You might also try the same profile in a Gunship Grey color too.

[Sentinel Chicken]

Okay, howzis?  One note - an HDU exiting under the aft fuselage the way I have it here wouldn't work.  The airplane would almost inevitably hit it on rotation.  You might be able to get away with something akin to that on the KC-10, where it's offset to one side and in a relatively small fairing though.  I was too lazy to draw that

J

Very nice, Jennings!

What I might suggest with the fusleage mounted HDU is have it exit out just behind the main undercarriage. There was a test program by Boeing and the USAF back in the 1970s or so that evaluated a similar installation on the KC-135 as a way of adding probe/drogue compatibility without losing boom function.

Robert Hopkins' Aerofax book on the KC-135 has several pictures.  

[Mossie]

Nice profile Jennings!  I saw one of the RNZAF 757's display last year.  Bloody Hell, he threw it around a bit, I didn't know airliners could do maneouvers like that!  I reckon when the pilot turned up drunk, the ground crew thought they'd have a laugh & tell him they'd got their A-4's back.....

[Jennings]

Nice profile Jennings!  I saw one of the RNZAF 757's display last year.  Bloody Hell, he threw it around a bit, I didn't know airliners could do maneouvers like that!  I reckon when the pilot turned up drunk, the ground crew thought they'd have a laugh & tell him they'd got their A-4's back.....

You may notice a vague similarity of the markings on the KC-40C to those on the RNZAF's 757s  I did a profile of the latter for an upcoming article on 757 colors & markings that will appear in Model Aircraft Monthly sometime soon-ish.

By the way, empty your browser cache and reload the KC-40C image...

J

[Jennings]

A drogue equipped USAF KC-32C.  Not very likely without a boom, but kinda nifty looking!

J

[Sentinel Chicken]

By the way, empty your browser cache and reload the KC-40C image...

Now we're in business! A tip of the hat and cold one in your honor, sir!

I recall somewhere being a suggestion of using a dedicated tanker only aircraft, like a Gulfstream GV or something smaller to split off the tanker role from the transport role. Pros and cons with that approach, but wouldn't that be interesting? Even using the 737-600 as a primary tanker and then a larger airframe for the tanker/transport role.  

[GTX]

Jennings,

I love the Kiwi 7373 - an alternative refuelling pod mount could be like on the Il-78s (I'm talking about the rear fuselage mount):




Regards,

Greg

[elmayerle]

Just use a Boeing 737-900ER

Isnt the USAF also looking at possibly buying KC-737 and KC-777? Of course they are also looking at KC-767...

Actually, that'd be more like a "KT-43D" or some such since the 737 is already in USAF service as the T-43 and CT-43 (Ron Brown was killed in the crash of a CT-43).

Surely KC-40, as the T-43 is first generation 737.

I still think a KC-32 would be cool (there was a proposal to plumb BA's 757s as emergency tankers for the RAF when they were ordered)

Works for me, I'd forgotten about the C-40s.  Sheesh, and there's a Naval Reserve squadron with them right across the field from work.

While we're on the subject, how about some VC-40s for staff transports?