Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
The tanker is sent into an area of war. bullets are flying, SAM's are flying, its a bloody mess. An unsurvivable tanker has no chance. What they mean by survivable is that the Airbus is 5x more likely to be knocked out in time of war. If a missile hits the KC-767, it is designed to take the hit and possibly fly home. Kind of important in my book, especially in an age where stealth is near mandatory.
-S
|
That's an exaggeration. Tankers are always kept back, and always escorted. Tankers _by their very nature_ are unsurvivable if it's being shot at.
PD |
Not modern ones. |
Come on, it's loaded with 160K pounds of _jet fuel_. If air to air missiles are hitting it, the fact is it isn't a tank.
And they didn't seem to think "survivability" was an issue the first time the 767 was selected?
http://www.military-aerospace-techno....cfm?DocID=335
PD |
The tanks themselves are re-sealing - no explosion possible if it maintains integrety. This is something lacking on the Airbus - It will blow up!
See the quote:
Quote:
|
-- Better fuel-tank-explosion protection features.
|
-S
PS. More info:
Quote:
|
Boeing's KC-767 Advanced Tanker will be equipped with the latest and most reliable integrated defensive equipment to protect the aircraft and crew by avoiding, defeating or surviving threats, resulting in unprecedented tanker survivability -- far superior to all current Air Force tankers as well as the Northrop/EADS KC-30. The Boeing KC-767 also includes a comprehensive set of capabilities that enables unrestricted operations while providing maximum protection for the tanker crew.
|
PPS. i think the keyword there is unrestricted.