Well, This Should Please Jennings

[Martin H]

and Burger king was British owned untill a few years ago

[Daryl J.]

The original Starbucks still exists just off Pike's Marketplace in Seattle.  It looks refreshingly like no other Starbucks unless it's recently changed.   Gotta love the PacNW climate for Lattes.     Hot climes + Latte = :ill:  IMHO.    

I'm surprised, however,  that there is no Starbucks in Buckingham Palace.  


Daryl J., contributing to thread drift heavily

[Martin H]

I'm surprised, however,  that there is no Starbucks in Buckingham Palace. 


Daryl J., contributing to thread drift heavily

give it time.........its bound to happen sooner or later..if only to please the hordes of colonial  tourists that swarm all over the place in the summer.

So will we see any of these KC-45 things serving with anyone else, or just USAF?

[Shasper]

Well, who else is up for new tankers? I figure that Turkey will need to replace their 135Rs soon, the French havent bought anything US in awhile (that would be hilarious thou'). . . Spain? Canada? Swaziland?


Shas B)

[Jennings]

So will we see any of these KC-45 things serving with anyone else, or just USAF?

Japan already has them in service, and Italy's are due to be delivered in 2008.

J

[Matt Wiser]

Don't forget the spinoffs-the EC and RC variants that are sure to follow. The RC-135s are just as old as the tankers, and they will be in need of replacement. ECs as well, so Boeing will make out quite a bit with the KC-45 program. And that's without additional export sales. There will be more (Israel, Saudi, South Korea, Turkey, Singapore, and Egypt), sure as the sun rises.  

[jcf]

Don't forget the spinoffs-the EC and RC variants that are sure to follow. The RC-135s are just as old as the tankers, and they will be in need of replacement. ECs as well, so Boeing will make out quite a bit with the KC-45 program. And that's without additional export sales. There will be more (Israel, Saudi, South Korea, Turkey, Singapore, and Egypt), sure as the sun rises.

There was the late lamented EC-10 based on the 767-400 airframe.
Don't hold your breathe waiting for a program revival.

Jon

[jcf]

The original Starbucks still exists just off Pike's Marketplace in Seattle.  It looks refreshingly like no other Starbucks unless it's recently changed.   Gotta love the PacNW climate for Lattes.     Hot climes + Latte = :ill:  IMHO.   

I'm surprised, however,  that there is no Starbucks in Buckingham Palace. 


Daryl J., contributing to thread drift heavily

Err Daryl,
that would be the Pike Place Market.
There aint' no "apostrophe S" on the word Pike.

Ya I know pointlessly pedantic, but I did spend a few years on the North Arcade in the '80s selling my metalwork/jewelry so its kinda personal.

Starbuck's is still the same.

Jon

[Matt Wiser]

Wasn't the E-10 program trying to pack multiple missions into the same airframe? ISTR an attempt at putting a combo of JSTARS and the RC-135 into a 767.  

[Jennings]

Honestly, I don't think you'll ever see an "RC-45".  So much of that mission is being undertaken via satellite and by UAVs, I think the days of the manned recce platform are numbered.  Likely if anything we'll see some specific ones (Cobra Ball RC-135S's) replaced by something like a 737-800 (P-8A) derivative, but not by a 767.  It'll be interesting to see what develops.  The RC fleet has LOADS more hours on it than any tanker does.

J

[B777LR]

I found the Italian selection of the 767 somewhat surprising, but then Alitalia (run for your life) has 767s and 777s and not A330s.  

But in that case, why did the RAF not order 767 (BA has 777 and 767)? So that wouldnt really be a viable reason...

[nev]

Well, who else is up for new tankers? I figure that Turkey will need to replace their 135Rs soon, the French havent bought anything US in awhile (that would be hilarious thou'). . .

About as likely as an A380 Air Force One

[Martin H]

The RAF went down the Airbus route for one reason. It was the lowest quote for new build airframes. The 767 bid was going to use ex British Airways birds. most likly with high milage on em, so they would wear out quicker.
Plus as a side note it also keeps the UK Airbus jobs going. But i doubt that counted for much with our current government. but keeping Gordons Euro masters happy would thou.

[Matt Wiser]

Well, for standoff ELINT/SIGINT, UAVs will be the way to go. However, you'll still want to "tickle" the target country's air defense system and see how fast they react-and all sorts of info comes out of the intercept. It takes a live ferret to do that. You might very well see an RC-45 or EP-8 for such work. And I'd bet the RC-135 folks would rather have a 767 than a 737 (lots more room for sensors and for the SENSOs to walk around to stretch their legs). See By Any Means Necessary by William Burroughs for a little more on this debate.  

[Jennings]

Contrary to popular belief (speaking as someone who has been intimately involved in the PARPRO program with the USAF), large four-engined SIGINT airplanes (at least American ones) don't "tickle" anything.  That's a really good way to get shot at (or down), and the last thing on earth any self-respecting RC-135 pilot or EWO wants is to get shot at (or down!).  It's romantic to think of the SIGINT community engaging in all sorts of daring-do with the bad guys, but in reality, it just doesn't happen.

Given the ENORMOUS cost of maintaining manned SIGINT platforms, I suspect it will be a cold day when we see another platform like the RC-135 or EP-3E built from the ground up.  There is virtually nothing you can do with one that you can't do with a UAV or a satellite.  The Global Hawk is an amazing piece of machinery.

J