The world of aviation marks an extraordinary milestone this year, as 2023 represents a centenary of air-to-air refuelling.
This facility has matured over the past hundred years, embedding itself as an essential element of modern-day Air Power.
On 27 June 1923, the idea of air-to-air refuelling first took flight in the USA. “The air-to-air refuelling concept was pioneered on 27 June 1923 in the USA when fuel was passed using a gravity hose between two De Haviland DH-4B aircraft,” a Royal Air Force press release recounts.
Such refuelling capabilities have had deep-seated implications for aerial missions. Not only does it permit aircraft to operate for prolonged periods, but it also enables them to cover vaster distances.
The press release brings to light the eminent Black Buck raids: “Arguably the most memorable example of this was just over 40 years ago during the Black Buck raids which saw Vulcan aircraft strike the Falkland Islands during a 7500-mile round trip.”
More recent achievements underscoring the critical role of in-flight refuelling include the Atlas A400M’s record-setting journey. The release states, “This refuelling ability saw the Atlas A400M achieve the longest single flight for its type, lasting some 22 hours from the UK to Guam, after being refuelled three times in transit.”
Furthermore, current operations such as the Baltic Air Policing and Operation Shader in the Middle East necessitate regular mid-air refuelling.
Today’s refuelling duties are shouldered by a range of aircraft. For the RAF, this responsibility is upheld by Voyager aircraft from the 10 and 101 Squadrons based at RAF Brize Norton. With a capacity to carry 111 tonnes of fuel, these Voyagers are integral to RAF’s global activities, routinely refuelling various aircraft.
“Indeed, the ability to refuel many different types of aircraft across diverse partner nations epitomises the interoperability and collaborative ethos we witness across Defence,” the release emphasised, underscoring its sustained relevance.
With the looming shortage of US tankers after the Boeing debacle and an increasing number of our large aircraft using the USAF boom system I would really love to see us install the refueling booms on our owned dedicated tanker aircraft.
Given the plumbing is there and the aircraft is already set up for it, it can be that expensive.
Having spoken to a voyager pilot mate about this, his point was that non of our boom refuelling aircraft ever need refuelling in flight. They have more than enough legs to stay airborne long enough for their current and predicted tasks. Our C17 fleet have extra fuel tanks fitted, so they can reach the Far East on internal fuel (apparently).
It’s a good point however all the mission thus far have been quite benign, one wonders about MPA for instance in the south Atlantic or high north. Any modern conflict against a peer adversary is likely to come with runway denial operations for hundreds if not thousands of miles from the AO especially in the Indo pacific.
P8s performance is above the crew hours, as when on patrol run on a single engine
The RC-135’s refuel of Norfolk everytime they fly using USAF KC-135’s, the P8’s at the moment do do any long range patrols like the nimrods used to do and the E7’s when we get would really beneift from beinf able to fly longer sorties with only 3 airframes it would reduce the landing cycles which is what affects aircraft life. Even C-17s would be able to take off carrying more payload then top off tanks rather than wasting MTOW with Fuel. Alos the ability to provide support to the USAF would be big plus for co-op working our A330’s are… Read more »
Presumably the AirTanker contract will eventually require extension/renewal? That would seem to be an opportune time to incorporate all the lessons learned into contract provisions. 🤔
Think the failure on the fact there was no suitable Tanker when the Tri- Star fleet said enough. MRRT was shedding booms in the Australian sky’s, And Pegasus, was full of faults. UK went safe. But also forced its Nato Partners to source there own tankers rather than use USA
Understand thanks. 😊
Does that mean that the MoD pays twice every time an RC-135 does AAR? I presume we compensate the USAF for the refuelling but additionally, unless the AitTanker contract has been renegotiated since I last looked at it then, apart from a few exceptions e.g. during a multinational joint exercise where no UK tankers are involved, any UK plane doing AAR from any non AirTanker assets needs to pay a per-litre levy to the AirTanker consortium. I did actually find the entire AirTanker contract online quite a few years ago so I have no inside knowledge, just what I remember… Read more »
I believe only have to pay if Air Tanker could not have fulfilled the tasking (ie: anything with boom) not sure if the itn would apply for NATO tasking where you have KC-135’s or NATo A330’s flying the tanker orbits over Eastern Europe
NATO Partners that use a Voyager create a credit that is used against if a AAR is required by a RAF, as the contract is still well under the line. Airtanker costs are set at the worst case scenario, so the RAF trades fuel.
All the Tanker fleet have No kit fitted for Boom operation. Part of the Air Tanker that a Voyager pilot could be sourced from Civic trained pilots. Airbus was requested by the RAF to look at cost to modify the Airframes. that the RAF don’t own. Air Tanker would then be exploited to re-fuel Allies and increase the fuel flow. Air tanker while expensive 10 years ago, actually is well under the line and no penalty cost will ever be hit. Airbus cost to boom was nearly as dear as New Airframes. of the UK heavies the only regular to… Read more »
Maybe AirTanker could trade in the current Voyagers for some newer A330 with both drogue and boom. They own them, rather than the RAF, after all.I assume they’ve got their money back by now?
Might want to check the cost of a brand new MRRT, over the cost of the contract average since 2016 the value is £500m per year, MRRT £366M each.
France costs of running its 9 is £450M, UK 10 fleet and 4 Surge currently Air – Tanker sounded a lot of money 10 years ago.
That puts a different spin on it, and the above conversations are interesting too.
Talk about aerial refueling…
When will we see RAF Typhoon in Guam… From Rafale with Love 😁
#Pegase 2023,
L’armée de l’air vous salue!
Why do civilians own one of the UK’S most vital military assets?
Because Labour/Gordon Brown wanted the costs of buying a new Tanker off the balance sheet?
It is what it is, I’m against the concept myself.
I agree Daniele. Labour/Brown did a similar stitch-up on PFI for new NHS hospitals where the NHS trusts are now having to overpay in order to service the shareholder returns when in the long term it would have been much more cost effective to finance with straight forward government debt. And those PFI sleights of hand only fooled certain sections of the electorate. Any half competent economists e.g. from ratings agencies knew damn well that getting capital investment up front and then making annual contract payments for years afterwards thus creating an ongoing liability was essentially exactly the same as… Read more »
It might be interesting to tot up all the examples of contractorisation/PFI in Defence either owning or running assets or both – I count the following: Officers & Sgts messes (probably the first contractorisation) – was Aramark, then Sodexho? Certain barracks – including Colchester, Bulford/Tidworth – RMPA/Sodexo, Clearsprings Ready Homes etc Certain defence estates/trg facilities – Landmarc Forces Quarters (ie ‘Married Quarters’) – Annington Homes HETs – FastTraxx AAR Tankers & Air Transport – AirTanker Aerial Targetry – was Saab, now QinetiQ Tri-Service helicopter training at RAF Shawbury – Ascent Flight Training Apache simulator (was at Arborfield) – ATIL? Army… Read more »
I try not to think about it, as I’m against it. Weren’t parts of the Defence Fire Service also sold off? Trials, LTPA with QinetiQ, the ranges remain MoD owned. Was once DTEO. QinetiQ itself, was once DERA. Royal Dockyards. Wider DD Communications network, from Skynet to HF Radio, ( DHFCS ), FO and microwave network sold off, ( Boxer Uniter ) the sites remain MoD but assets privatised. Skynet apparently coming back in house. Marshall, Defence Air Traffic Control. I didn’t know the Barracks you list were privatised? Is that just the SFA or operational buildings too? Are they… Read more »
Surely Airtanker contract must be up for renewal or ending soon?
No idea for sure, recall early 2030s?
That’s a long time to wait! But at least it would appear they are delivering accordingly to contract and a little more. Surely they are paid for so bring them into core budget?
I don’t think they’ll touch it. Whether Labour will do, anyone’s guess.
Presume cancellation fees? No issues with the capability provided to be fair. I was horrified at the time when our 30 plus Tanker force reduced to 9 +5, but with the drop of fast jet numbers it’s manageable.
I try to be positive, but I have a deep rooted scepticism that politicians see the MoDs budget directed 2 ways, nukes, and profit for big industry, and all the politics that entails.
26 year deal started in 2016, but the deal is for supply of Airworthy airframes so if they wear out. AT have to replace
How could I forget Capita for recruiting? Its horrific. There is often little evidence of VfM or improved output, compared to doing things in-house. My list was all about contractorisation/PFI. Merville Bks, Colchester (nothing to do with Married Quarters) is a huge (£2bn, 35 year) PFI contract with a consortium called RMPA (consisting of McAlpine, W.S. Atkins and Sodexho Defence Services and a major bank) 110 buildings across the 185 hectare site were new builds and 30 existing buildings were refurbished. I am not sure of the ownership position – certainly MoD own the land, but I don’t know who… Read more »
Christ….it is out of control.
Once you put it down in a list it’s quite an eye opener exactly how many areas and departments have been sold off and privatised. Many small, innocuous areas, which don’t seem to attract much outside interest or knowledge, the WOs and Sgts mess, being one of them! The biggest cluster for me would be Capita and recruiting mate!
Another sign of WHERE the money goes mate.
Agreed. It may only be small fry compared but in the WOs/Sgts mess, it was a little harder to arrange mess dos, overtime, sickness for mess staff, bar staff couldn’t wouldn’t stay late, mess bills increase, tea and toast slices were reduced etc! I know it sounds trivial on the grand scheme of things but the rot starts small and when not noticed it grows arms and-legs and becomes the Airtanker contract!!!!!
Come on…mess, tea and toast faaaar more important! Surprised you had the time, when not tearing Aldershite apart and annoying David!
Mate always time for tea and toast, but once in the mess we had all grown up (a bit) 😂👍
Yes, I totally remember that. In the officers mess in the old era, we used to do a whip round to keep a soldier barman on for an extra hour or two after the official closing time, if they agreed of course. Some mess members had their wedding reception in the Mess – not now as it got too expensive under contractors. Mess dos got very expensive. Was weird to be served by a barman with long hair and a stud in his nose, but we got used to it. The messes were a good place to put soldiers to… Read more »
Agreed mate, it may seem a small and trivial point, but it happened many moons ago and the rot always starts with little things!
Oh dear, how about spending a few moments doing research my little troll?
Evening ode chap, looked into it, and yes it puts finance 1st, military needs 2nd, ta ta duck
Weak effort just 1 out of 10.
Ode chap? not only do you spell your claimed countries name incorrectly you can’t even be sarcastic without making mistakes!
Sorry bit windy up in the pharaohs, I fell off my stool, nobody told me the window was open, and I was tired, now where has my copy of the magna carta gone
Still 1 out of 10, must do better. Your jealousy and fear of an EU without the UK is most obvious! I’m sure you will be ok, take heart, have courage and make more of an effort.
Why was the company Air Refuelling sold to a USA company. Its a vital strategic asset. Wake up UK and grow a pair.
Prime asset stripping, multiply parts of Chobham have all be sold by the money asset management companies. no better than Boeing or Airbus