New lease of life for Tristars in private air refueling

[Ghost from above]

Interesting article.looks like another company like Omega entering the private air refueling market.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/13 ... -refuelers

[Supra]

It would be good if a UK private Company could buy-up some cheap old AAR Boom-equipped US Tankers to refuel the UK's RC 135's, forthcoming P8 Poseidons & the inevitable F.35 variants.
Oh!...slight problem. Airtanker's contract for sole UK. AAR capacity is more water-tight than a duck's ass!
Could've worked??

[Ravendriver2008]

Interesting article.looks like another company like Omega entering the private air refueling market.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/13 ... -refuelers

I thought AGD Systems in Florida bought these back in 2015

http://nebula.wsimg.com/7a474ad5aaabd01 ... oworigin=1

Lest they've sold them in leased them to Tempus

And all six are on the FAA Reg

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry ... 0&PageNo=1

Cheers

[Bluetail]

The tricky bit for returning the Tri-Stars to flight will be trying to find qualified aircrew to fly them.

[Gorski84]

The tricky bit for returning the Tri-Stars to flight will be trying to find qualified aircrew to fly them.

[Sparts99]

not a rhetorical or sarcastic statement, but why did we get rid of them if they still have significant life and uses?

[ColintheCaterpillar]

not a rhetorical or sarcastic statement, but why did we get rid of them if they still have significant life and uses?

Because we upgraded to something better, more capable and less second hand.

[Dazza37]

not a rhetorical or sarcastic statement, but why did we get rid of them if they still have significant life and uses?

Because we upgraded to something better, more capable and less second hand.

Not to mention monumentally, eye-wateringly expensive with no wiggle room for upgrade or configuration change without more monumentally, eye-wateringly massive cost! Anyone who thinks the A330 PFI contract for the RAF is good value, or even a vaguely good idea is an absolute lunatic, or works for the Dick Turpin's running the contract! Much like the C-17 balls up, the A330's should've been bought outright from the start...

-Dazza

[jem60]

Were we privy to the costs of keeping the Tristars, versus A.330's.? There has to be some logic to it.. Or maybe I'm a lunatic like the politicians ?. I know that we know much better than politicians as to how to run an Air Force, but there had to be some sense in the decision.

[PeteHemsley]

What do you do when your car gets old and costs too much to maintain? You upgrade or look for something more reliable. There's no difference with aircraft. The Tristan's are old and were costing a fortune. The air tanker maintencanxe programme is shared between civil and military hands thanks to the multi role tasking and lease of contracts to the likes of Thomas cook. It was not a stupid decision by a ridiculous government, it had to happen.

[ColintheCaterpillar]

not a rhetorical or sarcastic statement, but why did we get rid of them if they still have significant life and uses?

Because we upgraded to something better, more capable and less second hand.

Not to mention monumentally, eye-wateringly expensive with no wiggle room for upgrade or configuration change without more monumentally, eye-wateringly massive cost! Anyone who thinks the A330 PFI contract for the RAF is good value, or even a vaguely good idea is an absolute lunatic, or works for the Dick Turpin's running the contract! Much like the C-17 balls up, the A330's should've been bought outright from the start...

-Dazza

It's what we've got though, and it's very good for what it's needed for. I'd rather have good kit on a rubbish 1990s written PFI than knackered secondhand airliners mixed with an aging fleet of 1960s multi-role cargo/pax aircraft which take a week to find a spare "on the cheap" (or slightly less expensive) .

[ColintheCaterpillar]

(And as I've probably said before, if we'd bought the A330s outright do you really think there was a hope in hell that the MoD would have been able to build the infrastructure at Brize to support it? Not a chance)

[Richard B]

I like how the USA, seem to get years more use out of its aircraft then we seem to do.
Look how old some of the types they still fly are.
Can you really say then that the Tristars are to old and knackered.

[jem60]

Out of all the l.1011 Tristars built, only one is still flying. Old, Knackered, desperately fuel inefficient, and very expensive to run. If they weren't, people would still be flying them. Actually, I think there is one that has been restored to flying with a view to doing pleasure flights. It recently flew in the States.

[JAWS]

Out of all the l.1011 Tristars built, only one is still flying. Old, Knackered, desperately fuel inefficient, and very expensive to run. If they weren't, people would still be flying them. Actually, I think there is one that has been restored to flying with a view to doing pleasure flights. It recently flew in the States.

Flew last month to Kansas City Airport - KMCI

http://www.airlinereporter.com/2017/07/ ... rns-skies/

http://www.tristarexperience.org/home/

[Richard E]

Out of all the l.1011 Tristars built, only one is still flying. Old, Knackered, desperately fuel inefficient, and very expensive to run. If they weren't, people would still be flying them. Actually, I think there is one that has been restored to flying with a view to doing pleasure flights. It recently flew in the States.

Isn't one also used by Orbital Sciences Corporation as a carrier for its Pegasus XL Satellite Launch Vehicle?

[jem60]

Yes, that is the one I referred to when I said there was only one flying. Then I realised the Tristar Experience example had recently flown. 2 airworthy Tri-stars then. Thankyou Stevie Jaws. Regards, John.

[Ghastly Whisper]

I like how the USA, seem to get years more use out of its aircraft then we seem to do.
Look how old some of the types they still fly are.

They have that place called AMARC that produces lots of spares from retired airframes, what do we have? RTP!!

[jem60]

We cannot store large amounts of airframes in this country. There isn't the need, and the climate most certainly doesn't allow it, unlike AMARC where there is very little corrosion!.

[Philwinward]

I think you will find we put more hours on our airframes relatively quickly compared with the US.

Phil