Anonymous KC-46

[tommc]

Noted in the static at Travis AFB, CA on 16th March 2024.











GOOD LUCK!!!!

[slogen51]

Flipping heck!

Could probably work it out from Acars messages!

[seven]

17-46036

[tommc]

17-46036

The strap looks more like 46086 to me.

[slogen51]

You need to see the book inside

[seven]

17-46036

The strap looks more like 46086 to me.

Twas my first thought, though couldn't find a match at the time. 21-46086 next bet then

[Alf]

036 is McConnell based, 086 is Travis, 056 is Seymour Johnson… 086 seems likely.

[tommc]

The engine cover strap being marked "46086" is not PROOF that the aircraft itself is actually 21-46086 though.

[gvr]

How do flight crew are expected to find their assigned plane when there's a whole tarmac full of them at some main AMC bases? Or are they given a map like this anecdote I heard in which MAC (at the time) flight crew during Desert Shield had to find their assigned plane at a Spanish transit base (Moron/Torrejon, the exact place escapes me..) And they even had numbers (albeit black on the old MAC Europe One camo) on them. I do wonder how this "security by obscurity" game plays out..

[nugget20]

I notice it doesn't even carry a TDB on the port nose.

[tommc]

I notice it doesn't even carry a TDB on the port nose.

Correct. Absolutely NO external identifying marks.

[KevinJ]

Madness from the boss of AMC, what in the world is the matter with showing the serial number, even in a data block? Maybe when the next commander takes over sanity will prevail?

[tommc]

Madness from the boss of AMC, what in the world is the matter with showing the serial number, even in a data block? Maybe when the next commander takes over sanity will prevail?

Not just AMC.

I have seen an un-edited picture of a flying USAF F-35 with no serial or code on the fin, it just has the last 4 on the nosewheel door.

[Rubberneck]

I don't see what it achieves. Everybody still knows it is a USAF aircraft.

[TonyO]

Madness from the boss of AMC, what in the world is the matter with showing the serial number, even in a data block? Maybe when the next commander takes over sanity will prevail?

Not just AMC.

I have seen an un-edited picture of a flying USAF F-35 with no serial or code on the fin, it just has the last 4 on the nosewheel door.

Is it possible that the F-35 has just come out of the depot, no other commands have declared they plan to follow AMC on this no markings route.

[Eagle130]

Going out on somewhat of a limb here if I may, while this is a frustrating development I think I can understand the reasoning behind it, partially at least. Allow me to explain and please feel free to jump in if you disagree!

It goes without saying that this hobby means different things to all of us here on the forum, we all get different experiences and have differing interests but a lack of identifying markings on an aircraft will of course have a fundamental impact on how us enthusiasts do our own individual things. Not being able to know which aircraft is which without actually being inside the cockpit makes any kind of tracking, logging or following essentially impossible to get right. I’m sure as time passes we will all adapt in our own ways to this and find other methods to keep an interest in the hobby.

So here is how I understand the lack of tail numbers, in my opinion it all comes down to maintaining that competitive advantage over adversaries, as everything ultimately does. Unfortunately, one of the most effective methods to prevent the enemy from getting intel about your capabilities is to not publish them anywhere in the first place. The less information that is made available, the harder anyone needs to work to figure out exactly which aircraft can do what.

Taking the broad brush stroke to remove all identity markings may seem counterintuitive but I think it all ties into one of the USAF buzzwords at the moment which is Interoperability. (Here’s an article explaining the concept for those who may not be familiar https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/202 ... ture-wars/)

Essentially Interoperability means to be flexible, dynamic and have all systems integrating together effectively.

Now, I am not going to speculate about USAF strategic goals and objectives on a public forum, I have my own thoughts as I’m sure many of you do too regarding what may be in the pipeline but I will leave those for those reading this to decide for themselves.

Essentially what I think this comes down to is that the aim for the AMC is to have aircraft that are capable of many standard tasks, some of which can go above and beyond do specific special missions that either require different internal aircraft equipment or an alternative use of existing equipment. Being able to hold the cards when it comes to knowing which aircraft can do what is the key here, they may all look like the same aircraft but if some have additional capabilities then the knowledge of where those additional capability aircraft are geographically located gives adversaries a narrowed down guess of what might be coming their way.

It’s exactly the same with the mission codes that we can find for certain flights, you can very quickly put a few pieces of information together and then before you know it the next deployment of aircraft to a certain destination is almost completely understood. Just think, if we as hobbyists and enthusiasts can get to those conclusions, a foreign government with malicious intentions certainly can too.

So in my opinion this is almost a no brainer really, the USA wants flexible, multirole aircraft that can demonstrate Interoperability and seamlessly integrate with the wider fleet.

I know that past conflicts where tail numbers were very clearly present is often used as a discussion point but fundamentally I don’t believe that is still valid, we live in a different world now, we have access to unthinkable amounts of information and can pass it on so quickly. An image of an aircraft arriving at a destination or a theory about what an aircraft has been up to seems trivial to us (and please don’t take this as criticism, as you will see from my posts tracking where stuff goes something I enjoy doing) but may be that tiny snippet of information an adversary hasn’t managed to glean, which may ultimately mean giving them the advantage in combat. To me this is just simply the next logical step in keeping assets, troops and citizens safe.

One final point to add, despite saying all of this, it is deeply saddening to see the tail numbers disappearing and yes perhaps at some point in the future they will change their tune and put the numbers back on aircraft but I certainly wouldn’t count on it.

[sdad]

I think that's 'interopability'.

[Nighthawke]

Try interoperability. If you must correct something do it correctly yourself.

[paddyboy]

Nice one, Ian

[sdad]

Sorree, late night!