KC-46 Pegasus "Austere Operations" • Northwest Field Guam
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 фев 2022
- Click to subscribe! bit.ly/subAIRBOYD
A U.S. Air Force KC-46 Pegasus assigned to McConnell Air Force Base, Kan., lands in an austere environment during exercise Cope North 22 on Northwest Field, Guam, Feb. 4, 2022. Cope North enhances U.S. relationships with regional allies and partners by fostering the exchange of information and refining shared tactics, techniques and procedures to better integrate multilateral defense capabilities and enhance interoperability in support of regional security.
Video by Tech. Sgt. Esteban Esquivel 36th Wing Public Affairs
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
#AIRBOYD #AvGeek #KC46 
Авто/Мото
Man o man the boeing 767 is such a pretty bird .
When I was there in the 70s, Northwest field was not in used. couple of tracking stations and open to Boy Scouts for camping use.
“Who the Hell…..POL!” Great to see that outstanding refueling support!
Glad i been part of building this plane !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The camera angel is Beautiful ❤️ Impressive clip.....Loved it
Can't wait to see them at March AFB. Congrats to Cali and Riverside. The base that should have never closed and left active Duty. Let's go March ARB now!
I was one of the ones who closed Mather AFB, then March AFB, and then my follow-on base, Carswell, which is now back open likewise. Congress made some really dumb decisions in base closings back then, and a lot of those closed bases are back operational, with most of them being a tanker base.
Same with Reese AFB.
Among my favorite tanker aircraft, the other being the KC-10.
I have a picture of me on Guam with a KC-10.
@@jvee2901 That's awesome, I have a picture of me sitting in seat 1D of a fully loaded AA 777-300ER while cruising 41,000 feet up at an unbelievable [repeat] *UNBELIEVABLE* 735 mph airspeed (I didn't think jet airlines could fly that fast either). Despite being the fastest flight I've been on, it was also the smoothest flight I was ever on so it felt like we were moving slower, LOL. It was the most fun I've had in a plane and I'd do it again more than 100 times if I could.
Got beef against the 135?
@@connorbaniak i flew to Darwin Australia in 1986 on a 135. Got great pictures of a B52 refueling over the south china sea.
@@jvee2901 have them posted anywhere? That would be great to see.
NW field was over grown and we used it for M-203 training when I was stationed on Guam. Pease ANGB has the KC-46. I have distant pictures on my phone from Portsmouth.
I put F-22s down on it last year! Good times.
@@95birdman miss Guam everyday. The beaches and ladies.
Nice view of the kc 46 pegasus usa military plane
gettin' the job done - well done +++
I think it was a big mistake not to equip the aircraft with thrust reversers. CFM sold the re-engine of the 135 fleet based upon the improved five rotor brakes. Weight is a huge consideration in landing short field. With contaminated runways, brakes won’t make the difference. While the five rotor brakes were amazing, they can’t make up for bad runways and high altitude landings. I have over 4000 hours in the KC, so my perspective comes from those many hours of mission experience. Having another tool in your handbag is priceless.
wait, so the KC-46 has no TR?
WTF
@@CapStar362 Yup. In today’s world of near flawless TR’s the USAF went cheap again. Really disappointing from a former tanker pilot.
@@edjarrett3164 i read a acquisitions document from the GAO, they actually PAID more to have them removed over the default keeping them and the cost of the engines in their default state.
So, no, not cheaper, just more dumb!
@@CapStar362 That pisses me off, as the storied picture sold to the media was that this was a huge cost savings to the taxpayer.
@@edjarrett3164 me equally, and it stripped out a ton of viable smaller airfields to operate out of.
Now thats close to the runway!! Have not seen these planes myself yet in service of the USAF. Only saw the Italians flying this type until now! The planes look good 😎
Kansas to Guam is a long ✈️ flight...
Many thanks to all allies of Ukraine. I bless you, and God bless you.
The person in charge of the KC-46 procurement program said: Why would a Tanker ever need reverse thrust? So we'll just delete it from an engine and airplane that usually comes with it as standard equipment. We'll here is your answer........
😂
The KC-135 does not have reverse thrust.
Cool👍
Unusual fuel coupling location compared to a regular 767
its tanker so it requires a higher capacity system for fuel on load
I'm a Crew Chief for the KC-46!!! Best plane ever!!
DJ how many fuel trucks does it take to fill up a 46?
Keep rotating like that and you’ll hit something eventually. Also, why’d they leave the gear down so long?
I take that they are also now operating off Tinian .
no usable airfield there
Im biased growing up in the 135. However, people and equipment retire. I wish the crews well and a long life to the 767.
so that’s what i’ve been hearing in my room in some days
Did they not put reverse thrust on this plane?
When are they going to leave Guam???
Top 🇧🇷🇧🇷👁️👁️🇧🇷🇧🇷
Airline pilots in the making.
@Matt Mann at McConnell they’re active duty and Reserve
why aren't the reverse thrusters deployed ?
KC-46 doesn't have them.
No thrust reverser
No Thrust Reverse?!??!!?
They don't have them.
Austere…that’s funny
these guys like to land and takeoff like hotshots I guess eh
This is the north field... practicing short landings and takeoffs on Island strips in case China takes out Anderson.
@Matt Mann Cyber and Space are the new frontiers yes, but the threat China poses to Guam with Ballistic missiles is not to be taken lightly. Don't take my word for it, look at what the military is doing. Just installed an Iron Dome system and put in a THAAD missile system at the north field which is the subject of this video. Even in a limited South China Sea dust-up, Guam is likely the first place to be targeted. Hence why KC-46's, F-16's, F-35's, among others, are practicing operating out of remote strips.
In a potential conflict with CCP,
The USAF needs to locations that they can safely land their tankers
Unlike the USN and USMC which use drogue tankers
The USAF relies solely on boom tankers which can be easily targets
They need no thrust reversers
They have no choice, KC-46 as well as KC-135R don't have thrust reversers.
Bad mo fo
I know what Austere is. And this ain't it.
a KC-10 much better
@Matt Mann but the KC-46 is a piece of junk
@@davidharris2519 Please explain why you feel this way. In truth, we only got the KC-10 because Congress forced it upon the Air Force. The Air Force really wanted the KC-747 which was a much better deal and package, but because Lockheed hasn’t been awarded a major contract, Congress forced the KC-10 on us. Being a retired Boom Operator who have flown both the KC-135’s and the KC-10’s, I would think that the KC-46 falls right inline with the other Boeing tankers that have preceded it - the KC-97 and KC-135 series. The fact that the KC-135’s are still flying and still the backbone of the tanker force speaks volumes for the Boeing planes. I loves flying the KC-10s, but ain’t nothing like flying a Boeing aircraft. I’m looking forward to a flight on the KC-46. I was stationed at the Boeing plant in Wichita, KS (1992-1995) when they converted the 767’s for Japan. So the knowledge of building a tanker isn’t nothing new for Boeing.
@@markweaver4424 the 46 has had so many problems cant carry fuel cant carry people the KC-10 is so much better i spoke too AF people who were on the 10 they loved it they knew the 46 was a problem
@@davidharris2519 Need I remind the KC-10 side of the house all of the issues the plagued it before they were ironed out? Any new aircraft is going to have some issues from design to full production. And let’s not forget all of those last minute changes that come into play. The Pegasus will hold it’s own, just as the other two continue to do.
@@davidharris2519the KC-10 may hold more fuel and carry more passengers but the fact is that USAF needed a replacement. The last KC-10 rolled off the production line in 1987 and the last DC11, of which it’s based, left the factor in the early 2000s, so getting more KC-10s is out the question. The 767 of which the KC46 is based is current, efficient and zero hours rolling off the line. Additionally, if you can name an aircraft that was introduced into any airforce that didn’t have issues then go ahead. The Europeans struggled with issues on the Airbus Voyager when that was introduced, and hey that probably carries a different amount of fuel and passengers too!!
These things are a absolute piece of crap, kc-135 all the way.
The 767 is a great plane but anytime you convert a plane to something else it will have issues it needs to have worked out