Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Military
TACC tracking fuel by AC name >

TACC tracking fuel by AC name

Search

Notices
Military Military Aviation

TACC tracking fuel by AC name

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-13-2008, 06:43 PM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MoosePileit's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 529
Default

If they track locals they may not allow a 17 ship, 7 hour, 1/3 million gallon formation flight.to log about 300 beans.. Or they might build more assualt strips in good airspace so I don't have to drone 2 hours per sortie to get my assualts! Oops, that's politics for ya....

Don't waste, but don't sweat it in flight- sweat the planning to get it the way it should be. Or just take the dispatch and hope it works out....
MoosePileit is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 06:08 AM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Riddler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Left Seat, Toyota Tacoma
Posts: 593
Default

Originally Posted by MoosePileit
If they track locals they may not allow a 17 ship, 7 hour, 1/3 million gallon formation flight.to log about 300 beans.. Or they might build more assualt strips in good airspace so I don't have to drone 2 hours per sortie to get my assualts! Oops, that's politics for ya....

Don't waste, but don't sweat it in flight- sweat the planning to get it the way it should be. Or just take the dispatch and hope it works out....
Funny... about 18 months ago, I was pushing a plan to spend $400K of O&M (split between 2 bases) to save $4.5M of TWCF. Of course, the answer was no. It would have eliminated that 2 hour per sortie droning time.
Riddler is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 06:21 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
hjs1971's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: KC-135R IP/EP
Posts: 273
Default

Sputnik,

Tankers do not pi$$ away gas anymore when the receiver canx's or can't take fuel...we have a required matrix to run, first, you try to find another recvr, then you fly home with gear down, boards extended, burning an ungodly amount of fuel and shaking the rivets off the jet (literally), then you hold at flaps 50, gear down until you finally get a waiver for a heavy weight landing. If you EVER dump fuel in this mans Air Force, you will be on the carpet the next morning to explain your declaration of an emergency because that is the only way you will ever get approval to dump (the AOR and Edwards AFB have slightly different rules). 3 years ago, we dumped millions of pounds a year, now, I bet we're dumping 20% of what we used to.

FWIW, my squadron has an informal fuel burn tracking spreadsheet (by AC's name) and is posted by stan/eval every month. We don't put too much weight on it because there are SO many variables with every sortie, even a 2 hour local. I know most of our form 59's don't even have our AC's name in it due to airbridge staffing, etc. so good luck to TACC trying to track my fuel burn (and yes, I do all the little things to try and save gas too).
hjs1971 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 02:39 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Posts: 900
Default

How much fuel do we waste doing DV lifts and Capstones? That'll never stop though because this is a business man's Air Force.

You haven't seen the worst of it by far. I wouldn't be suprised when 3/4 of our training will be in the simulator with very little hands on the real thing in the not so distant future. I know that the KC-135 sims can now do formation, linked to another sim on the other side of the country. They're also going to incorporate tactics and threat recognition into it (like we have a choice in the tanker besides bending over and kissing your ass goodbye). Just wait and see what happens when there's a democrat in the White House again. We'll all be logging touch and goes on a friggen broomstick.
TankerDriver is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 04:16 PM
  #15  
Line Holder
 
BrutusBuckeye's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: C-17A IP
Posts: 53
Default

Originally Posted by MoosePileit
If they track locals they may not allow a 17 ship, 7 hour, 1/3 million gallon formation flight.to log about 300 beans.. Or they might build more assualt strips in good airspace so I don't have to drone 2 hours per sortie to get my assualts! Oops, that's politics for ya....

Don't waste, but don't sweat it in flight- sweat the planning to get it the way it should be. Or just take the dispatch and hope it works out....
Yes...but what a fun flight that was!
BrutusBuckeye is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 05:13 PM
  #16  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: BBJ Evaluator
Posts: 25
Default

When I flew the 135, there was a thesis paper that circulated that actually stated that flying closer to .80 ot .81 was more cost effective than Best Range in the tanker. I can't remember the numbers exactly, but it was something like 5k more burned, but 30 mins saved...multiplied by time saved on 4 engines and airframe...compared to the cost of fuel at the time, it made more sense to fly faster.

BTW I noticed that the tankers were leading the way with overtankering of fuel...somehow I don't see that as a bad thing.
USAFAviator is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 05:52 PM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MoosePileit's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 529
Default

Originally Posted by BrutusBuckeye
Yes...but what a fun flight that was!
e tu, Brutus? PM me you'd like- yep- the wx was clear and a bazill so the crappy ATC and goofball airspace just didn't matter.
MoosePileit is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 06:51 PM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
hjs1971's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: KC-135R IP/EP
Posts: 273
Default

Originally Posted by USAFAviator
When I flew the 135, there was a thesis paper that circulated that actually stated that flying closer to .80 ot .81 was more cost effective than Best Range in the tanker. I can't remember the numbers exactly, but it was something like 5k more burned, but 30 mins saved...multiplied by time saved on 4 engines and airframe...compared to the cost of fuel at the time, it made more sense to fly faster.

BTW I noticed that the tankers were leading the way with overtankering of fuel...somehow I don't see that as a bad thing.
That paper is the "Carson Speed" paper...99% cost, blah, blah, blah, more engineering speak, blah, blah...laymens terms: .792 mach is the best speed to fly a -135 at (as long as you are above FL280 ish...)
hjs1971 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 07:02 PM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Petting Zoo
Posts: 2,091
Default

Originally Posted by hjs1971
Sputnik,

Tankers do not pi$$ away gas anymore when the receiver canx's or can't take fuel...we have a required matrix to run, first, you try to find another recvr, then you fly home with gear down, boards extended, burning an ungodly amount of fuel and shaking the rivets off the jet (literally),
Sorry, wasn't trying to throw a dart. Flew with a guard guy the other day, former 135, told me he stopped counting at 1,000,000 lbs.

Most of the dumping I know of is in the AOR. My point, no matter what I do till retirement I will never save the 100,000 that occasionally gets dumped on a single sortie. Or used to happen.
Sputnik is offline  
Old 01-15-2008, 05:27 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
hjs1971's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: KC-135R IP/EP
Posts: 273
Default

Sputnik,

I didn't take it as a dart, just saying it's totally different today than it was 3 years ago, that's all...I remember the days of launching a 3 ship against a phantom receiver (somebody forgot to make sure he took off) and each of the 3 dumping close to 100k to get to landing weight...
hjs1971 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vagabond
Military
2
12-16-2007 04:08 AM
A300jetflyer
Cargo
9
11-09-2007 10:22 AM
CRJammin
Cargo
19
08-19-2007 05:21 PM
RockBottom
Major
3
02-24-2006 02:05 PM
SWAjet
Major
0
02-26-2005 11:49 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices