Voyager demonstrated its multiple functionalities in the recent Exercise Mobility Guardian 23 in the western Pacific.
The Voyager, which is designated as a Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft, fulfilled its roles with exceptional performance, say the RAF.
“Royal Air Force Voyager tested in multiple roles during Pacific air exercise,” stated an official tweet, highlighting the versatility of the RAF aircraft. The Voyager was operated by three crews from 10 and 101 Squadron, initially deployed to Eielson Airbase in Alaska with 72 passengers onboard.
“On arrival at Eielson, the passengers disembarked to allow more fuel to be taken on board and maximise Voyager’s capabilities as a tanker,” read another post, outlining the process undertaken to ensure optimal use of the aircraft’s tanker functionalities.
Subsequently, the Voyager was refuelled to its maximum take-off weight and set out to meet with an A400M Atlas, also based at RAF Brize Norton, over northern Alaska. After transferring fuel to the Atlas, which was en route to Guam, the Voyager adjusted its altitude to maximise fuel efficiency.
A further refuelling rendezvous with the Atlas occurred over the Aleutian Islands in the Pacific, enabling the Atlas to complete its journey from the UK to Guam.
The versatile Voyager then returned to Eielson Airbase to collect the passengers before proceeding to Guam, demonstrating its dual principal roles as a strategic long-range Air-to-Air Refuelling and passenger transport aircraft.
Any idea what’s likely to replace airtanker? I think the PFI is due to end in a few years, perhaps we can pick up all the infrastructure and equipment cheap. Voyagers still have many years left in them and it might go some way to offsetting the high cost we have endured for years.
Probably a buy 3 or 4 Voyagers outright. Then to fill up the shortfall use the A400
Still avoiding the front line I see Frost, good for you….
😄
I think the contract was for 30 years??
My question would be what’s happening to the 5 not being used?
The A320-200 is getting long in the tooth for airline use, so will we be paying for 5 aircraft sat in the Arizona desert very soon?
Another great Labour PPFI to kick the procurement can down the road!
Tony and Gordon, the gift that keeps on giving!!
Yep, it was a 27 year contract so we are stuck with the ridiculous set up until 2035!
Canada has just announced its buying upto 9 A330 MRTT from Airbus, by buying cheaper second hand A330-200s and converting them to MRTT, to be in service by 2028. Sounds like a plan to me.
Two already on the way so will that be total number or additional? A big boost to the RCAF transport fleet either way. Sensible and of course whey you own them then other assets can be used such as the A400’s if we ever get enough……… 🙁
Believe it to be ,9 in total, either way a significant increase in their tanker capabilities.
We as ever are still constrained by the ‘Airtanker,’ PPFI contract which still has a decade or so to run. If ever there was a case of how not to run the military this is probably at the top of the pile?
Sounds like a great plan, France has ordered 12 fully configured MRTT also…
I always thought that an A330 MRTT on steroids would be good, higher all up weight, think large cargo door, full reinforced freight interior, reconfigurable for passengers / Freight / additional fuel tanks or a combination of the above.
With the boom tail, boom receptacle and probe up front…
Maximum bang for your buck…
Perhaps we should start looking into it for a 2035 in service date…
That should have been the way to go right from the beginning, flying boom, probe etc and a contract that allows the A400M to be used as a Tanker as well.
About a decade or so ago, AUS were looking to bolster it’s air transport capabilities, and we’re seriously looking at buying 6-8 second hand Boeing 747/767 freight aircraft.
The plan was to make them a mix of passenger/vehicle/stores compatible while adding a fueling system for AAR. They were looking at around $50 mill AUS per airframe fully converted. All were to be low mileage airframes, at a fraction of a new mil spec transport aircraft, obviously only airport to airport, but you see the advantages, this is in effect what the Canadians are doing with their order for Airbus A330. Sometimes, simple can really work…
France who owns Airbus slow to buy its own product ?????
To be fair Jon, I think that’s been down to French defence budget juggling.
A new fleet of 12 MRTT’s is a substantial outlay and it’s taken a while to work it into the long term defence planning.
They have taken the right route in my opinion, an owned fleet of the world’s best MRTT’s.
The RAF will have to make a replacement tanker decision, just as Tempest deliveries (if all goes well) start ramping up.
Hopefully the budget will be there. Some decisions relating to this capability will have to be made in about 5 years time.
If Airbus still have all their ducks in a row in the 2030’s, we should be able to buy whatever big twin tanker they are rolling off the line then….
It’s entirely possible that the RAF may require more tankers, as capable loyal wingman start to swell the AAR tasking in the 2030’s.
Only issue with that converting old A330s doesn’t give you the wing of a A340 and the extra fuel capacity in that wing. not a full blown MRTT
I don’t think that they intend them to be used as full blown MRTT, but more of a hybrid transport/passenger/AAR aircraft.
If it works for them then good on them, as it will be an increase in capability for them whatever they intend with them.
The spare 5 are leased to Civilian Airlines for a small profit, if you’ve flown Thomas Cook or Jet2 out of Manchester there’s a chance you’ve flown on a RAF Voyager.
Evening Dern, yep, what I’m saying is the A330 200 is about at the end of its airlines life, as more modern and efficient big twins are now available.
So within a couple of years, all 5 will be out of work and we the tax payer will be paying for them to sit out in desert storage…
To be fair, I’m pretty sure we’ll get another 10 years out of them. A330 200 is still rolling off the production line, with 3 new built this month, so I doubt that the market for leasing a few will dry up completely before then.
Correction: I’m misreading my source, yeah last civilian 330-200 was delivered 2019. Still, there are 330-200 from the 90’s still flying, so cautiously optimistic.
Hopefully a few more years of offsetting then👍
5 Spare 2 raised to service as pure transport, in the early days of the Ukraine invasion to allow tankers to tank.
There are 10 in RAF service (1 being VIP) and 1 operated by AirTanker for the airbridge so that leaves 3 not in use.
Would be good to see newer A330 variants adapted for MRTT.
It would be better for the RAF to get OUT of the ridiculous air tanker contract. RIGHT NOW.
The costs are obscene. It’s possibly the most extreme example of public contract corruption on display in a western government.
Unfortunately Chris, I think we are locked in and cancellation would be extremely expensive.
At this point we just have to make do and plan for the mid 2030’s.
We do at least have time to look into anew more flexible and most importantly ‘OWNED’ fleet of 12 MRTT’s should be procured.
only expensive, IF they cross the boundary in to penalty contract. currently due to the restriction on the types they can supply, well under the red line.
2 Spare stood up for transport duty, 1st days of the Ukraine war, to ensure tankers on tanker duty
No that’s the beauty of the PFI, 14 Airframes as per contract 5 200s were still new build and have very few hours and cycles, compared to a traditional airframe owned by a airline. regardless of there age, 14 airframes is the contract
26 years and we are only 10 years in. £390m a year 10 years ago sounds cheap today. 14 Aircraft each one would cost £300m new. maybe just maybe if the Tristar fleet wasnt knackered they could of got a better deal. Marshalls proposed more Tri-Stars more 30 year old airframes. but that cost was compared to the Tristar yearly cost @ the time. and was a saving.
Yes great aircraft and very versatile especially with the Aerial Refuelling Boom System (ARBS) and two Cobham 905E under-wing refuelling pods as Fitted in the RAAF aircraft configuration.
except RAF never used Boom, no crews trained to fly boom, and at the time of order the Booms kept leaving the aircraft.
We now have 9 Posiden and 3 E7’s on order we can’t refuel …
My preferred option would be an owned fleet of 12 MRTT’s that we could closely operate alongside France to provide a really useful joint fleet.
Fact is, we can start long term planning for 2035 when the contracts up
So would i But 1x MRTT =$300M each. where do you find that Budget, Service Cost, Crew when RAF cannot train enough Pilots currently. P8 on-service time is longer than Crew time. so you have missed the need to refuel. E7s the same and NATO Partners are charged to use a RAF Voyager, and this system currently offsets the entire C17/Rivert/P8/E7 fleet. but No mentions that side.
Not currently having a capability doesn’t mean you can never have it. We could’ve easily shipped some off to the US or Aus for training and to keep current until we got Voyager and a boom training programe spun up.
Instead we ended up with 8 C-17, 3 RC-135, 9 P-8, 14 Voyager, and 3 E-7 that we can’t refuel.
Or to put it another way, the vast majority of our transport fleet and all our ISTAR fleet.
USA doesnt have MRRT so how would train, Aus the Booms at the time of the UK order kept flying off the aircraft, at the Time required there was only one suitable option. Voyager has no refuelling capability, P8 on station is longer than Crew time. E7s the same. RC/C17s Refuel from the Buddy system of the Nato that plugs into the Voyagers, we are not in the 1980s Crying over a capability we never had. like crying over a Rattle.
They’d at least have the fundamentals of boom ops, if not the specific platform knowledge.
Two booms fell off test aircraft, one due to a UAE specific modification. The issue was resolved and it hasn’t happened since.
If Voyager has no refuelling option it’s because we specced it that way, because we didn’t buy booms. Every other MRTT comes with the UARRSI refuelling point (also used on US C-130s among other aircraft). From the photos I’ve seen, I think Voyager has it too.
Still useful to refuel P-8/E-7 – see the 17 hour sortie a RAAF E-7 did requiring 2 refuels. There’s plenty of reasons an aircraft could have to fly beyond crew hours – these are military aircraft, not civvy jets taking people to Benidorm. Who’s to say the runway hasn’t been bombed while you were out, forcing you to divert to a distant base to stay out of range?
Not sure what you’re talking about rel C-17/RC-135 and a buddy system, but I can tell you that RC-135 refuels at the start of most sorties, and has to use KC-135s from Mildenhall because it’s boom only. I think you’re talking about the centreline high flow drogue, which is only fitted to the KC3s, and is now only useful for Atlas, given our other big probe equipped aircraft (Nimrod, Sentry, Herc) are all out of service.
Again, not sure why you think having never had a capability means we should never complain about not having it? We didn’t have stealth jets until a few years ago, and many people would be rightly complaining if we still didn’t have them.