I've got more than a few questions on aerial refueling, but I'll try to keep it to a couple at a time:
1) Is aerial refueling as incredibly difficult as it seems on DCS A-10C?
2) When a flight of 2 or more goes to refuel, how do they form up with the tanker? Echelon left/right with most empty aircraft on inside? Do the planes that complete fueling go back into the formation waiting to get gas or form up other the other wing of the tanker, etc.?
3) Can someone with aerial refueling experience walk us through a sample four-ship refueling? e.g., "Flight lead directs flight to refueling control point, calls tanker on radio...".
Glad to see this up here- I think your system worked really well and whatever the answer is the system you have works perfectly and I will promote it. Simple... effective.
1) Is aerial refueling as incredibly difficult as it seems on DCS A-10C?
I haven't tried AAR using DCS, so my answer will just suggest that the fine level of aircraft control needed to do this may be beyond the ability of our sticks and throttles.
Is AAR difficult in the real world? Perhaps, but most fighter pilots seem to get the hang of it. I've tanked off of KC-97s, KC-135s, and KC-10s when I was flying F-4s and A-10s. Each tanker and fighter types has its own pluses and minuses...taking gas in the F-4 from a KC-97 was the most challenging because of the slow speed of the tanker. We had one engine in min burner and used the other engine to hold position. We joked that we probably were burning fuel as fast as we were taking it on board!
Other things that complicated matters included the weather, in VN we tanked in some really low viz situations...also, holding position on the boom is more difficult when the tanker turns.
Quote:
When a flight of 2 or more goes to refuel, how do they form up with the tanker? Echelon left/right with most empty aircraft on inside? Do the planes that complete fueling go back into the formation waiting to get gas or form up other the other wing of the tanker, etc.?
I usually kept folks in route when joining for max formation flexibility. The order of refueling was up to the flight lead...some had the element or wingies go first. I usually went first so that the others had max fuel when we came off the tanker. Sometimes, a flight member might 'top off' before the flight leaves.
Depending on refueling order, the lead would direct folks to return to the tanker's wing, usually the one that they originally formed up on...but it was up to the lead...so lead and 2 would be on one wing, 3 and 4 on the other, for example.
Quote:
Can someone with aerial refueling experience walk us through a sample four-ship refueling? e.g., "Flight lead directs flight to refueling control point, calls tanker on radio...".
One of my early Wolf articles takes a F-4 flight thru refueling...it might answer some of your questions.
As for the comms, these ranged from the basic calls used in training up to the limited comms used operationally. It wasn't unusual for experienced flight leads and boom operators to cycle a flight thru with minimal radio chatter. In training, the pilot would make required calls throughout the entire process...from initial tally to coordinating the direction of dropping off the tanker...go here, say this...then go there and say that, etc.
You probably have more questions, so let's hear them!
On BMS, the flight forms up on the tanker's left wing, left echelon formation, lead gets fuel first (unless one guy is REALLY low on gas), followed by 2, then 3, then 4. The guys that have finished form up on the right wing of the tanker, right echelon. There's a "quick flow" procedure wherein when lead is getting fuel, 2 flys off lead's wing in a pre-contact position so when lead is finished, 2 can come straight in then 3 goes into formation on 2's wing, and so on.
When all guys are finished, the flight leaves the tanker track, goes to their assigned/desired altitude, and flight lead puts them back into whatever formation he thinks is necessary.
Usually only the lead needs to talk to tanker, everyone else shuts up. According to Dan Hampton (Viper Pilot author), there may be comms between pilot and boom operator during peace time but when in combat there was no chatter.
Anyway, this is how I am familiar with it... would be interesting to see how it compares to real life!
EDIT: Sniped by Andy, but keeping it for comments...
On BMS, the flight forms up on the tanker's left wing, left echelon formation, lead gets fuel first (unless one guy is REALLY low on gas), followed by 2, then 3, then 4. The guys that have finished form up on the right wing of the tanker, right echelon. There's a "quick flow" procedure wherein when lead is getting fuel, 2 flys off lead's wing in a pre-contact position so when lead is finished, 2 can come straight in then 3 goes into formation on 2's wing, and so on.
One note about echelon...it's a more difficult formation to hold position if there are more than two members. #4 often feels like the flight is playing 'crack the whip' because he's at the end of everyone's position correction. When I flew as #4 in echelon, I tried to fly off #1 while maintaining my lateral separation from #3...this allowed me to 'null out' the movement of # 2 and #3.
I'm not a big fan of echelon...good for coming down initial for the break, but that's about it.
Is there any other formation done? I do get what you're saying about "crack the whip" though and I agree.
For a tanker join up?
I suppose so...fingertip, for example...but route worked best for me. Flexible, allowed the wingies to look around. As a wingie, I relished the chance to get a tally on the tanker before lead.
We're lucky that we have a 'boomer' tanker and not a 'hose and drogue' tanker, I'd imagine that ups the difficulty level a few notches having to formate and prod? Here..
1) Is aerial refueling as incredibly difficult as it seems on DCS A-10C?
2) When a flight of 2 or more goes to refuel, how do they form up with the tanker? Echelon left/right with most empty aircraft on inside? Do the planes that complete fueling go back into the formation waiting to get gas or form up other the other wing of the tanker, etc.?
1) Dont know about DCS, dont have it. Is it difficult? Usually no, but it can be. If it's very turbulent, if theres weather (tanking in clouds, yay), if the tanker insists on flying manually (and not on autopilot), if the sun is right in your eyes, if the director lights on the old KC-135s are barely readable (if at all) or if you're just having a bad day haha. But in general, it's pretty easy once you get used to it. Dont know about probe and drogue, that looks like a #%&*$#.
2) We usually head towards the tanker in a fighting wing kind of formation, then once close number one can usually go straight to the boom (unless theres another flight there), the rest forms up on the left wing in a loose kind of echelon so as to ease the cracking the whip effect etc. Of course if theres gonna be clouds it'll become a tighter formation! When done go to the right wing, whoever went first is on the wing and the rest forms up on him. Usually lead goes first unless someone has a really low fuel state. I have not heard of this quick flow thing, but really, if flown well it only takes a small amount of time to switch to the next receiver anyway.
1) Probe and Drogue is not that hard once you get the tricks explained. Mostly is about position to hold and don't get fixated on the drogue. Look at it only the last 2 feet before contact. Then is just hold position.
I'm not a pilot but I can do it consistently with little hassle after some practice. (Official Air Force Full Simulator)
Hard but not that hard. Unless poor weather as stated.
"It takes forever +/- 2 weeks for the A-10 to get anywhere significant..." Ice
"Ha! If it gets him on the deck its a start!" MigBuster
"What people like and what critics praise are rarely the same thing. 'Critic' is just another one of those unnecessary, overpaid, parasitic jobs that the human race has churned out so that clever slackers won't have to actually get a real job and possibly soil their hands." Sauron
"It takes forever +/- 2 weeks for the A-10 to get anywhere significant..." Ice
"Ha! If it gets him on the deck its a start!" MigBuster
"What people like and what critics praise are rarely the same thing. 'Critic' is just another one of those unnecessary, overpaid, parasitic jobs that the human race has churned out so that clever slackers won't have to actually get a real job and possibly soil their hands." Sauron
What airspeed(s) and altitude(s) is aerial refueling conducted at for the A-10? I read somewheres that the published speed is something like 210 KIAS, but the A-10s really prefer something a bit slower, like 195 KIAS, but I haven't read anything about altitudes.
1) Is aerial refueling as incredibly difficult as it seems on DCS A-10C? [\quote]
It's difficult at first when you don't know what to do..
I used to hop in flights on MP and get estimations of ground speed from people playing. The best thing to do, is download the mission, open it with editor, and check tanker altitude and speed (that is ground speed).
Next, practice shelling with no loadout, half loadout, and full loadout.
Finally, before actually considering refuelling, set joystick curves to 30. And trim nose down but keep nose zeroised by pulling just bit on stick. I'm using CH stick, so quality may vary. I've refuelled my first 9500 lbs from 2000 lbs with a clean plane just yesterday.
220 KIAS. Any slower and the tanker falls out of the sky, any faster and A-10's may potentially have problems keeping up (but if they're able to do 250KIAS, like Andy said, do it that way). You don't need to be slow to refuel, it makes things very sluggish and puts you in a dangerous part of the flight envelope. The altitude block you want to use is 10000-20000', and taking the midpoint tends to work well (15000').
Originally Posted By: EinsteinEP
Andy (or any A-10 or tanker pilot),
What airspeed(s) and altitude(s) is aerial refueling conducted at for the A-10? I read somewheres that the published speed is something like 210 KIAS, but the A-10s really prefer something a bit slower, like 195 KIAS, but I haven't read anything about altitudes.
I have seen F-16's (2008, 2009) refuel twice and A-10's (2001) refuel once, they all came in from the right wing. Got pictures and video of the 16's from 2009.
Refueling A-10s is a fine balance for the tanker and the receiver. At certain weights, we will lower our flaps to allow us to fly slow enough to not outrun the Hawg. In theater, the A-10 is fully loaded and can barely manage 200kts. More likely 195kts, but no slower as our boom on the KC-135 stalls at 190kts. In order to prevent the A-10 from falling off the aft limit, we'll set up for the toboggan manuever, where we'll start a shallow decent to give a couple extra kts.
As far as where they start/end, Lead is allowed to come straight to the boom with #2 (and on) will form up on the left wing (called left wing observation). After the offload is completed, the aircraft cycle left to right to the right observation position to clear off.
- that above pic about an F-16 refueling, that's what called boomer method right? - which one is easier between that boomer method and the navy planes method (hose and drogue?)? I mean in reality. - I'd assume that the navy method should be more easier since you can see while you cannot see with the boomer method....? am I correct? - why the 2 separate methods exist?
- that above pic about an F-16 refueling, that's what called boomer method right? - which one is easier between that boomer method and the navy planes method (hose and drogue?)? I mean in reality. - I'd assume that the navy method should be more easier since you can see while you cannot see with the boomer method....
Copy, F-16 needs a boomer for refueling.
I don't know which method is easier. I only refueld with A-10 and F-16 (in simulations )
If you can fly close formations (which IMO are still more difficult than aerial refueling) and know how to handle your plane with small control inputs then its not hard to refuel with the boomer method.
I guess its not a big difference between both ways when you are able to handle your plane.
I don't think one is necessarily easier than the other. With the drogue, you put the refuelling probe in the basket, you do all the work. With the boom, you fly to a specific point under the tanker and the boomer puts the refuelling probe into the receptacle.
One difference is that the boom can pump more gas vs the drogue, IIRC, so getting topped up is quicker.
Great thread! In see refuelling over my house semi regularly, but its higher and faster but that's likely due to the fact that 9/10 times its a C-17 or at best a C-135 variant. Usually 20 to 25 thousand and 250 knots
I've done refuelling in real life, probe and drogue only.
I think, in sim, AAR is more difficult. But it depends on sim. For example, i find it difficult in BMS. In DCS I really appreciate the final phase, the last few meters, where you can really feel to go ahead or not to catch the probe.
The main point, even in real life is to stick to a method and never, never deviate from it, even when you are fully confident or have timing issues.
- you have to stick to 3 references : + your alignement with the tanker axis, that should be as well the boom axis. For a probe and drogue, the two should be different... + your relative speed (may be the most difficult point to catch in a sim) + your staging (the one easy to go in a yoyo...)
- first, rejoin on echelon left with the tanker. Do not arrive strait behind the tanker. From echelon position it will be more easy to see the relative speed. From echelon position do you cockpit check and watch your HUD speed and RMP you have (speed in HUD is not really use in real life, but it help a lot in a sim). Try to find a good throttle position, and work from it as a reference (not watching all the time you RPM, but making correction from this throttle position.
- then move behind and down from the tanker, with smooth correction, to join the axis of the tanker (and the probe), with negative staging, aiming not to far behind the probe.
- make smooth correction to get 0 relative speed, get a corret axis ans a zero staging regarding the probe.
- then when 3 axis are good, we go to catch the probe. During this moving ahead phase : + do not watch the probe. Stick to the tanker has a reference, get the probe with periferal vision. Using this methode, will get you avoiding hard correction with elevator (zig zag up and down). If you do zigzag or yoyo, stop moving foward, stop your correction, get back to the 3 first reference then go again. + make correction to one reference by one at a time. If you try to correct the 3 references at the same time you will fail... axis, staging, speed then axis, staging speed then... + get a very few knots has relative speed. Do not wait to see a correction effect to stop it. For example, if you reduce RPM to reduce relative speed, do not wait to see your aircraft moving backward to get RPM up, it will be to late and you will do yoyo with speed. + last few meters (for DCS) decide if it's a go or no go. At this point only look for the probe and make the last corrections. (may be at one meter or less)
- after contact, do not focus on the probe (DCS) or the light (BMS). Look the tanker and try to stick to a global position. In DCS, tanker engine position in your canopy is a very good reference... Watch precisely for your the light (BMS) or boom color (DCS) then go back to your global reference, or try to catch the light or color of the boom using your periferal vision (not easy in a sim...)
- be cool ! if tanker is turning, even before contact, it is not a problem. Do not watch for horizontal reference. The reference is now the tanker wing axis and fuselage axis.
- after AAR, move backward slowly, then rejoin echelon right, make your cockpit check and leave the tanker.
Hope this help. Main points are not to watch too early the probe and to be smooth ! You have a boomer, let him help you !
Nice screens. They look just like the video I've got from an A-10 friend who shot vid when I was refueling him.
I've gotten a ton of time in our KC-135 sim and have made contact as the receiver, as well as some time over in the C-17 sim. It wasnt easy, but after a few tries and correcting some PIO, I was making contact pretty easily.
Advice I can give is to try flying formation on the tanker for a while. Use small stick inputs to stay in position. Speed is fairly constant, so that is easy to match. Altitude as well, as we dont move much. After you've mastered that, move to pre-contact and hold that position. Dont focus on the boom nozzle, but on references on the tanker. If you can see the bulges on top of the wing above the gear, you are too high. Allow the black ruddevators to cradle the boom pod/window. That is 50 feet-ish. Start adding power to begin forward movement toward the boom. 3-5 feet per second is a good closure rate. Once the boom is in the receptacle, reduce power slightly to stay in the green area on the boom. Small inputs...
Miki, were you on Mirages? The FAF drivers over Afghanistan always told me "No boom assistance". I guess the FAF C-135FR booms would jiggle the stick and try to help. The F1 guys would request a toboggan also.
We used to call for a no boom assistance as for us with BDA we do "all" the job. From time to time we were suprised to see the boom moving in the last few feet when we where on this phase moving to catch it.
F1 and toboggan, yes... 2000 also, maybe one or two for me, with hot temp and high level.
I had great time on US tanker. Remember some night / bad weather / low fuel situation, those one you are happy to meet a tanker !
Great video Cmatt, thanks for posting! I live about two miles north of Miramar, so it was cool to see it from that perspective (if my analysis of the terrain was accurate).
Ken Cartwright
No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.
Fascinating discussion, guys. Gosh, this is such an educational place. Thanks for the picture, Cali. Boy do I love the F-16.
"From our orbital vantage point, we observe an earth without borders, full of peace, beauty and magnificence, and we pray that humanity as a whole can imagine a borderless world as we see it, and strive to live as one in peace." Astronaut William C. McCool RIP, January 29, 2003 - Space Shuttle Columbia
We're lucky that we have a 'boomer' tanker and not a 'hose and drogue' tanker, I'd imagine that ups the difficulty level a few notches having to formate and prod? Here..
It is true, it is not unusual for fighter aircrafts refueling using a basket to have taken it back home with them.
Probably because you were good in doing this! Others are not, of course S-O-M-E-T-I-M-E-S!
Italian Air Force Aerial Refueling Exercise Accident. Italian military troops in the refuel tanker film out
A Sea Stallion CH-53E Helicopter in a Mid Air Refueling Accident, which cuts the Fuel Probe with a KC-135 Stratotanker or a C-130. This short but revealing video clip shows how robust the rotor blades are of this Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter. The Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion is the biggest and heaviest helicopter in the United States military. It was developed from the CH-53 Sea Stallion, principally by adding a third engine, a seventh blade to the main rotor and canting the tail rotor by 20 degrees. It is operated by the USMC United States Marine Corps and currently there are about 152 CH-53E helicopters in service. Although not fully in shot the aerial fuel tanker looks like a KC-135 Stratotanker. The KC-135 was the US Air Force's first jet-powered refueling tanker and replaced the KC-97 Stratotanker. Although the Stratotanker was initially used to refuel strategic bombers, it was later used in the Vietnam War and later conflicts including Operation Desert Storm to extend the range and endurance of US fighters, bombers, and larger helicopters. It is due to be replaced by the Boeing KC-46 in 2018. Note: The air tanker may be a C-130 but we don't have a positive confirmation of this. Can any viewer help with a correct identification?
aAnd Finally Maverick with Goose. Probably he was absent, he was thinking about his blonde! :-)
Awacs sometimes got problems too
And Finally when B-52 crashed with a tanker full of nuclear wepaons they split nuclear material all aroun like in Palomares
The 1966 Palomares B-52 crash or Palomares incident occurred on 17 January 1966, when a B-52G bomber of the USAF Strategic Air Command collided with a KC-135 tanker during mid-air refuelling at 31,000 feet (9,450 m) over the Mediterranean Sea, off the coast of Spain. The KC-135 was completely destroyed when its fuel load ignited, killing all four crew members. The B-52G broke apart, killing three of the seven crew members aboard.[1] Of the four Mk28 type hydrogen bombs the B-52G carried,[2] three were found on land near the small fishing village of Palomares in the municipality of Cuevas del Almanzora, Almería, Spain. The non-nuclear explosives in two of the weapons detonated upon impact with the ground, resulting in the contamination of a 2-square-kilometer (490 acres) (0.78 square mile) area by plutonium. The fourth, which fell into the Mediterranean Sea, was recovered intact after a 2½-month-long search.[3]
