Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Aerial refueling
View on Wikipedia
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|

Aerial refueling (en-us), or aerial refuelling (en-gb), also referred to as air refueling, in-flight refueling (IFR), air-to-air refueling (AAR), and tanking, is the process of transferring aviation fuel from one aircraft (the tanker) to another (the receiver) while both aircraft are in flight.[a] The two main refueling systems are probe-and-drogue, which is simpler to adapt to existing aircraft and the flying boom, which offers faster fuel transfer, but requires a dedicated boom operator station.
The procedure allows the receiving aircraft to remain airborne longer, extending its range or loiter time. A series of air refuelings can give range limited only by crew fatigue/physical needs and engineering factors such as engine oil consumption. Because the receiver aircraft is topped-off with extra fuel in the air, air refueling can allow a takeoff with a greater payload which could be weapons, cargo, or personnel: the maximum takeoff weight is maintained by carrying less fuel and topping up once airborne. Aerial refueling has also been considered as a means to reduce fuel consumption on long-distance flights greater than 3,000 nautical miles (5,600 km; 3,500 mi). Potential fuel savings in the range of 35–40% have been estimated for long-haul flights (including the fuel used during the tanker missions).[1]
Usually, the aircraft providing the fuel is specially designed for the task, although refueling pods may be fitted to existing aircraft designs in the case of "probe-and-drogue" systems. The cost of the refueling equipment on both tanker and receiver aircraft and the specialized aircraft handling of the aircraft to be refueled (very close "line astern" formation flying) has resulted in the activity only being used in military operations; there are no regular civilian in-flight refueling activities. Originally trialed shortly before World War II on a limited scale to extend the range of British civilian transatlantic flying boats, and then employed after World War II on a large scale to extend the range of strategic bombers, aerial refueling since the Vietnam War has been extensively used in large-scale military operations.
Development history
[edit]Early experiments
[edit]
Some of the earliest experiments in aerial refueling took place in the 1920s; two slow-flying aircraft flew in formation, with a hose run down from a hand-held fuel tank on one aircraft and placed into the usual fuel filler of the other. The first mid-air refueling, based on the development of Alexander P. de Seversky, between two planes occurred on 25 June 1923, between two Airco DH-4B biplanes of the United States Army Air Service. An endurance record was set by three DH-4Bs (a receiver and two tankers) on 27–28 August 1923, in which the receiver airplane remained aloft for more than 37 hours using nine mid-air refueling to transfer 687 US gallons (2,600 L) of aviation gasoline and 38 US gallons (140 L) of engine oil. The same crews demonstrated the utility of the technique on 25 October 1923, when a DH-4 flew from Sumas, Washington, on the Canada–United States border, to Tijuana, Mexico, landing in San Diego, using mid-air refuelings at Eugene, Oregon, and Sacramento, California.
Similar trial demonstrations of mid-air refueling technique took place at the Royal Aircraft Establishment in England and by the Armée de l'Air in France in the same year, but these early experiments were not yet regarded as a practical proposition, and were generally dismissed as stunts.
As the 1920s progressed, greater numbers of aviation enthusiasts vied to set new aerial long-distance records, using inflight air refueling. One such enthusiast, who would revolutionize aerial refueling was Sir Alan Cobham, member of the Royal Flying Corps in World War I, and a pioneer of long-distance aviation. During the 1920s, he made long-distance flights to places as far afield as Africa and Australia and he began experimenting with the possibilities of in-flight refueling to extend the range of flight.[2]
Cobham was one of the founding directors of Airspeed Limited, an aircraft manufacturing company that went on to produce a specially adapted Airspeed Courier that Cobham used for his early experiments with in-flight refueling. This craft was eventually modified by Airspeed to Cobham's specification, for a non-stop flight from London to India, using in-flight refueling to extend the plane's flight duration.
Meanwhile, in 1929, a group of US Army Air Corps fliers, led by then Major Carl Spaatz, set an endurance record of over 150 hours with a Fokker C-2A named the Question Mark over Los Angeles. Between 11 June and 4 July 1930, the brothers John, Kenneth, Albert, and Walter Hunter set a new record of 553 hours 40 minutes over Chicago using two Stinson SM-1 Detroiters as refueler and receiver. Aerial refueling remained a very dangerous process until 1935, when brothers Fred and Al Key demonstrated a spill-free refueling nozzle, designed by A. D. Hunter.[3] They exceeded the Hunters' record by nearly 100 hours in a Curtiss Robin monoplane,[4] staying aloft for more than 27 days.[5]
The US was mainly concerned about transatlantic flights for faster postal service between Europe and America. In 1931 W. Irving Glover, the second assistant postmaster, wrote an extensive article for Popular Mechanics concerning the challenges and the need for such a regular service. In his article he even mentioned the use of aerial refueling after takeoff as a possible solution.[6]
At Le Bourget Airport near Paris, the Aéro-Club de France and the 34th Aviation Regiment of the French Air Force were able to demonstrate passing fuel between machines at the annual aviation fete at Vincennes in 1928.[7] The UK's Royal Aircraft Establishment was also running mid-air refueling trials, with the aim to use this technique to extend the range of the long-distance flying boats that serviced the British Empire. By 1931 they had demonstrated refueling between two Vickers Virginias, with fuel flow controlled by an automatic valve on the hose which would cut off if contact was lost.[8]
Royal Air Force officer Richard Atcherley had observed the dangerous aerial-refueling techniques in use at barnstorming events in the US and determined to create a workable system.[9] While posted to the Middle East he developed and patented his 'crossover' system in 1934, in which the tanker trailed a large hooked line that would reel in a similar dropped line from the receiver, allowing the refueling to commence. In 1935, Cobham sold off the airline Cobham Air Routes Ltd to Olley Air Service and turned to the development of inflight refueling, founding the company Flight Refuelling Ltd. Atcherly's system was bought up by Cobham's company, and with some refinement and continuous improvement through the late '30s, it became the first practical refueling system.[10]
Grappled-line looped-hose
[edit]
Sir Alan Cobham's grappled-line looped-hose air-to-air refueling system borrowed from techniques patented by David Nicolson and John Lord, and was publicly demonstrated for the first time in 1935. In the system the receiver aircraft, at one time an Airspeed Courier, trailed a steel cable which was then grappled by a line shot from the tanker, a Handley Page Type W10. The line was then drawn back into the tanker where the receiver's cable was connected to the refueling hose. The receiver could then haul back in its cable bringing the hose to it. Once the hose was connected, the tanker climbed sufficiently above the receiver aircraft to allow the fuel to flow under gravity.[11][12]
When Cobham was developing his system, he saw the need as purely for long-range transoceanic commercial aircraft flights,[13] but modern aerial refueling is used exclusively by military aircraft.
In 1934, Cobham had founded Flight Refuelling Ltd (FRL) and by 1938 had used its looped-hose system to refuel aircraft as large as the Short Empire flying boat Cambria from an Armstrong Whitworth AW.23.[5] Handley Page Harrows were used in the 1939 trials to perform aerial refueling of the Empire flying boats for regular transatlantic crossings. From 5 August to 1 October 1939, sixteen crossings of the Atlantic were made by Empire flying boats, with fifteen crossings using FRL's aerial refueling system.[14] After the sixteen crossings further trials were suspended due to the outbreak of World War II.[15]
During the closing months of World War II, it had been intended that Tiger Force's Lancaster and Lincoln bombers would be in-flight refueled by converted Halifax tanker aircraft, fitted with the FRL's looped-hose units, in operations against the Japanese homelands, but the war ended before the aircraft could be deployed. After the war ended, the USAF bought a small number of FRL looped-hose units and fitted a number of B-29s as tankers to refuel specially equipped B-29s and later B-50s. The USAF made only one major change in the system used by the RAF. The USAF version had auto-coupling of the refueling nozzle, where the leader line with the refueling hose is pulled to the receiver aircraft and a refueling receptacle on the belly of the aircraft, allowing high-altitude air-to-air refueling and doing away with the aircraft having to fly to a lower altitude to be depressurized so a crew member could manually do the coupling.[16]
This air-to-air refueling system was used by the B-50 Superfortress Lucky Lady II of the 43rd Bomb Wing to make its famous first non-stop around-the-world flight in 1949.[17][18] From 26 February to 3 March 1949, Lucky Lady II flew non-stop around the world in 94 hours and 1 minute, a feat made possible by four aerial refuelings from four pairs of KB-29M tankers of the 43d ARS. Before the mission, crews of the 43rd had experienced only a single operational air refueling contact. The flight started and ended at Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas with the refuelings accomplished over the Azores, Saudi Arabia, the Pacific Ocean near Guam, and between Hawaii and the West Coast.[19]
Probe-and-drogue system
[edit]Cobham's company FRL (now part of Cobham plc) soon realized that their looped-hose system left much to be desired and began work on an improved system that is now commonly called the probe-and-drogue air-to-air refueling system and today is one of the two systems chosen by air forces for air-to-air refueling, the other being the flying-boom system. In post-war trials the RAF used a modified Lancaster tanker employing the much improved probe-and-drogue system, with a modified Gloster Meteor F.3 jet fighter, serial EE397, fitted with a nose-mounted probe.[20][21] On 7 August 1949, the Meteor flown by FRL test pilot Pat Hornidge took off from Tarrant Rushton and remained airborne for 12 hours and 3 minutes, receiving 2,352 imperial gallons (10,690 L) of fuel in ten refuelings from a Lancaster tanker. Hornidge flew an overall distance of 3,600 mi (5,800 km), achieving a new jet endurance record.[22][23]
Modern specialized tanker aircraft have equipment specially designed for the task of offloading fuel to the receiver aircraft, based on drogue and probe, even at the higher speeds modern jet aircraft typically need to remain airborne.
In January 1948, General Carl Spaatz, then the first Chief of Staff of the new United States Air Force, made aerial refueling a top priority of the service. In March 1948, the USAF purchased two sets of FRL's looped-hose in-flight refueling equipment, which had been in practical use with British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC) since 1946, and manufacturing rights to the system. FRL also provided a year of technical assistance. The sets were immediately installed in two Boeing B-29 Superfortresses, with plans to equip 80 B-29s.
Flight testing began in May 1948 at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, and was so successful that in June orders went out to equip all new B-50s and subsequent bombers with receiving equipment. Two dedicated air refueling units were formed on 30 June 1948: the 43d Air Refueling Squadron at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, and the 509th Air Refueling Squadron at Walker Air Force Base, New Mexico. The first ARS aircraft used FRL's looped-hose refueling system, but testing with a boom system followed quickly in the autumn of 1948.
The first use of aerial refueling in combat took place during the Korean War, involving F-84 fighter-bombers flying missions from Japanese airfields, due to Chinese-North Korean forces overrunning many of the bases for jet aircraft in South Korea, refueling from converted B-29s using the drogue-and-probe in-flight refueling system with the probe located in one of the F-84's wing-tip fuel tanks.
Systems
[edit]This section needs additional citations for verification. (April 2012) |
Flying boom
[edit]
The flying boom is a rigid, telescoping tube with movable flight control surfaces that a boom operator on the tanker aircraft extends and inserts into a receptacle on the receiving aircraft. All boom-equipped tankers (e.g. KC-135 Stratotanker, KC-10 Extender, KC-46 Pegasus) have a single boom and can refuel one aircraft at a time with this mechanism.
History
[edit]In the late 1940s, General Curtis LeMay, commander of the Strategic Air Command (SAC), asked Boeing to develop a refueling system that could transfer fuel at a higher rate than had been possible with earlier systems using flexible hoses, resulting in the flying boom system. The B-29 was the first to employ the boom, and between 1950 and 1951, 116 original B-29s, designated KB-29Ps, were converted at the Boeing plant at Renton, Washington. Boeing went on to develop the world's first production aerial tanker, the KC-97 Stratofreighter, a piston-engined Boeing Stratocruiser (USAF designation C-97 Stratofreighter) with a Boeing-developed flying boom and extra kerosene (jet fuel) tanks feeding the boom. The Stratocruiser airliner itself was developed from the B-29 bomber after World War II. In the KC-97, the mixed gasoline/kerosene fuel system was clearly not desirable and it was obvious that a jet-powered tanker aircraft would be the next development, having a single type of fuel for both its own engines and for passing to receiver aircraft. The 230 mph (370 km/h) cruise speed of the slower, piston-engined KC-97 was also a serious issue, as using it as an aerial tanker forced the newer jet-powered military aircraft to slow down to mate with the tanker's boom, a highly serious issue with the newer supersonic aircraft coming into service at that time, which could force such receiving aircraft in some situations to slow down enough to approach their stall speed during the approach to the tanker. It was no surprise that, after the KC-97, Boeing began receiving contracts from the USAF to build jet tankers based on the Boeing 367-80 (Dash-80) airframe. The result was the Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker, of which 732 were built.
The flying boom is attached to the rear of the tanker aircraft. The attachment is gimballed, allowing the boom to move with the receiver aircraft. The boom contains a rigid pipe to transfer fuel. The fuel pipe ends in a nozzle with a flexible ball joint. The nozzle mates to the "receptacle" in the receiver aircraft during fuel transfer. A poppet valve in the end of the nozzle prevents fuel from exiting the tube until the nozzle properly mates with the receiver's refueling receptacle. Once properly mated, toggles in the receptacle engage the nozzle, holding it locked during fuel transfer.
The "flying" boom is so named because flight control surfaces, small movable airfoils that are often in a V-tail configuration, are used to move the boom by creating aerodynamic forces. They are actuated hydraulically and controlled by the boom operator using a control stick. The boom operator also telescopes the boom to make the connection with the receiver's receptacle.
To complete an aerial refueling, the tanker and receiver aircraft rendezvous, flying in formation. The receiver moves to a position behind the tanker, within safe limits of travel for the boom, aided by director lights or directions radioed by the boom operator. Once in position, the operator extends the boom to make contact with the receiver aircraft. Once in contact, fuel is pumped through the boom into the receiver aircraft.

While in contact, the receiver pilot must continue to fly within the "air refueling envelope", the area in which contact with the boom is safe. Moving outside of this envelope can damage the boom or lead to mid-air collision, for example the 1966 Palomares B-52 crash. If the receiving aircraft approaches the outer limits of the envelope, the boom operator will command the receiver pilot to correct their position and disconnect the boom if necessary.
When the desired amount of fuel has been transferred, the two aircraft disconnect and the receiver aircraft departs the formation. When not in use, the boom is stored flush with the bottom of the tanker's fuselage to minimize drag.
In the KC-97 and KC-135 the boom operator lies prone, while the operator is seated in the KC-10, all viewing operations through a window at the tail. The KC-46 seats two operators at the front of the aircraft viewing camera video on 3D screens.
The US Air Force fixed-wing aircraft use the flying boom system, along with Australia (KC-30A),[24] the Netherlands (KDC-10), Israel (modified Boeing 707), Japan (KC-767), Turkey (KC-135Rs), and Iran (Boeing 707 and 747). The system allows higher fuel flow rates (up to 1,000 US gallons (3,800 L) / 6,500 pounds (2,900 kg) per minute for the KC-135, but does require a boom operator, and can only refuel one aircraft at a time.
Probe-and-drogue
[edit]
The probe-and-drogue refueling method employs a flexible hose that trails from the tanker aircraft. The drogue (or para-drogue), sometimes called a basket, is a fitting resembling a shuttlecock, attached at its narrow end (like the "cork" nose of a shuttlecock) with a valve to a flexible hose. The drogue stabilizes the hose in flight and provides a funnel to aid insertion of the receiver aircraft probe into the hose. The hose connects to a hose drum unit (HDU). When not in use, the hose/drogue is reeled completely into the HDU.
The receiver has a probe, which is a rigid, protruding or pivoted retractable arm placed on the aircraft's nose or fuselage to make the connection. Most modern versions of the probe are usually designed to be retractable, and are retracted when not in use, particularly on high-speed aircraft.[citation needed]
At the end of the probe is a valve that is closed until it mates with the drogue's forward internal receptacle, after which it opens and allows fuel to pass from tanker to receiver. The valves in the probe and drogue that are most commonly used are to a NATO standard and were originally developed by the company Flight Refuelling Limited in the UK and deployed in the late 1940s and 1950s.[citation needed] This standardization enables drogue-equipped tanker aircraft from many nations to refuel probe-equipped aircraft from other nations.
The NATO-standard probe system incorporates shear rivets that attach the refueling valve to the end of the probe.[citation needed] This is so that if a large side or vertical load develops while in contact with the drogue, the rivets shear and the fuel valve breaks off, rather than the probe or receiver aircraft suffering structural damage. A so-called "broken probe" (actually a broken fuel valve, as described above) may happen if poor flying technique is used by the receiver pilot, or in turbulence. Sometimes the valve is retained in the tanker drogue and prevents further refueling from that drogue until removed during ground maintenance.
Buddy store
[edit]A "buddy store" or "buddy pod" is an external pod loaded on an aircraft hardpoint that contains a hose and drogue system (HDU).[25] Buddy stores allow fighter / bomber aircraft to be reconfigured for "buddy tanking" other aircraft. This allows an air combat force without dedicated/specialized tanker support (for instance, a carrier air wing) to extend the range of its strike aircraft. In other cases, using the buddy store method allows a carrier-based aircraft to take-off with a heavier than usual load less fuel than might be necessary for its tasking. The aircraft would then topped-up with fuel from an HDU-equipped "buddy" tanker, a method previously used by the Royal Navy in operating its Supermarine Scimitar, de Havilland Sea Vixen, and Blackburn Buccaneers; in the Buccaneer's case using a bomb-bay-mounted tank and HDU.

The tanker aircraft flies straight and level and extends the hose/drogue, which is allowed to trail out behind and below the tanker under normal aerodynamic forces. The pilot of the receiver aircraft extends the probe (if required) and uses normal flight controls to "fly" the refueling probe directly into the basket. This requires a closure rate of about two knots (walking speed) to push the hose several feet into the HDU and solidly couple the probe and drogue. Too little closure will cause an incomplete connection and no fuel flow (or occasionally leaking fuel). Too much closure is dangerous because it can trigger a strong transverse oscillation in the hose, severing the probe tip.
The optimal approach is from behind and below (not level with) the drogue. Because the drogue is relatively light (typically soft canvas webbing) and subject to aerodynamic forces, it can be pushed around by the bow wave of approaching aircraft, exacerbating engagement even in smooth air. After initial contact, the hose and drogue is pushed forward by the receiver a certain distance (typically, a few feet), and the hose is reeled slowly back onto its drum in the HDU. This opens the tanker's main refueling valve allowing fuel to flow to the drogue under the appropriate pressure (assuming the tanker crew has energized the pump). Tension on the hose is aerodynamically 'balanced' by a motor in the HDU so that as the receiver aircraft moves fore and aft, the hose retracts and extends, thus preventing bends in the hose that would cause undue side loads on the probe. Fuel flow is typically indicated by illumination of a green light near the HDU. If the hose is pushed in too far or not far enough, a cutoff switch will inhibit fuel flow, which is typically accompanied by an amber light. Disengagement is commanded by the tanker pilot with a red light.[25]
The US Navy, Marine Corps, and some Army aircraft refuel using the "hose-and-drogue" system, as do most aircraft flown by western European militaries. The Soviet Union also used a hose-and-drogue system, dubbed UPAZ,[26] and thus later Russian aircraft may be equipped with probe and drogue. The Chinese PLAF has a fleet of Xian H-6 bombers modified for aerial refueling, and plans to add Russian Ilyushin Il-78 aerial refueling tankers.[27] Tankers can be equipped with multipoint hose-and-drogue systems, allowing them to refuel two (or more) aircraft simultaneously, reducing time spent refueling by as much as 75% for a four-aircraft strike package.[28]
Boom drogue adapter units
[edit]
USAF KC-135 and French Air Force KC-135FR refueling-boom equipped tankers can be field-converted to a probe-and-drogue system using a special adapter unit. In this configuration, the tanker retains its articulated boom, but has a hose/drogue at the end of it instead of the usual nozzle. The tanker boom operator holds the boom still while the receiver aircraft flies the probe into the basket. Unlike the soft canvas basket used in most drogue systems, the adapter units use a steel basket, grimly known as the "iron maiden" by naval aviators because of its unforgiving nature. Soft drogues can be contacted slightly off center, wherein the probe is guided into the hose receptacle by the canvas drogue. The metal drogue, when contacted even slightly off center, will pivot out of place, potentially "slapping" the aircraft's fuselage and causing damage.[dubious – discuss]
The other major difference with this system is that when contacted, the hose does not "retract" into an HDU. Instead, the hose bends depending on how far it is pushed toward the boom. If it is pushed too far, it can loop around the probe or nose of the aircraft, damage the windscreen, or cause contact with the rigid boom. If not pushed far enough, the probe will disengage, halting fueling. Because of a much smaller position-keeping tolerance, staying properly connected to a KC-135 adapter unit is considerably more difficult than staying in a traditional hose/drogue configuration. When fueling is complete, the receiver carefully backs off until the probe refueling valve disconnects from the valve in the basket. Off center disengagements, like engagements, can cause the drogue to "prang" the probe and/or strike the aircraft's fuselage.
Multiple systems
[edit]
Some tankers have both a boom and one or more complete hose-and-drogue systems. The USAF KC-10 has both a flying boom and a separate hose-and-drogue system manufactured by Cobham. Both are on the aircraft centerline at the tail of the aircraft, so only one can be used at once. However, such a system allows all types of probe- and receptacle-equipped aircraft to be refueled in a single mission, without landing to install an adapter. Other tankers are equipped with hose-and-drogue attachments that do not interfere with the operation of the centerline boom: many KC-135s are equipped with dual under-wing attachments known as Multi-point Refueling System (MPRSs), while some KC-10s and A330 MRTTs have similar under-wing refueling pods (referred to as Wing Air Refueling Pods or WARPs on the KC-10).
Wing-to-wing
[edit]A small number of Soviet Tu-4s and Tu-16s (the tanker variant was Tu-16Z), used a wing-to-wing method. Similar to the probe-and-drogue method but more complicated, the tanker aircraft released a flexible hose from its wingtip. An aircraft flying alongside had to catch the hose with a special lock under its wingtip. After the hose was locked and the connection was established, the fuel was pumped.[29]
Simple grappling
[edit]Some historic systems used for pioneering aerial refueling used the grappling method, where the tanker aircraft unreeled the fuel hose and the receiver aircraft would grapple the hose midair, reel it in and connect it so that fuel can be transferred either with the assistance of pumps or simply by gravity feed. This was the method used on the Question Mark endurance flight in 1929.
Compatibility issues
[edit]The probe-and-drogue system is not compatible with flying boom equipment, creating a problem for military planners where mixed forces are involved.[30] Incompatibility can also complicate the procurement of new systems. The Royal Canadian Air Force currently wish to purchase the F-35A, which can only refuel via the flying boom, but only possess probe-and-drogue refuelers. The potential cost of converting F-35As to probe-and-drogue refueling (as is used on US Navy & Marine Corps F-35Bs and F-35Cs) added to the early-2010s political controversy which surrounded F-35 procurement within the RCAF.[31][needs update]
These concerns can be addressed by drogue adapters (see section "Boom drogue adapter units" above) that allow drogue aircraft to refuel from boom-equipped aircraft, and by refuelers that are equipped with both drogue and boom units and can thus refuel both types in the same flight, such as the KC-10, MPRS KC-135, or Airbus A330 MRTT.
Strategic
[edit]
The development of the KC-97 and Boeing KC-135 Stratotankers was pushed by the Cold War requirement of the United States to be able to keep fleets of nuclear-armed B-47 Stratojet and B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers airborne around-the-clock either to threaten retaliation against a Soviet strike for mutual assured destruction, or to bomb the USSR first had it been ordered to do so. The bombers would fly orbits around their assigned positions from which they were to enter Soviet airspace if they received the order, and the tankers would refill the bombers' fuel tanks so that they could keep a force in the air 24 hours a day, and still have enough fuel to reach their targets in the Soviet Union. This also ensured that a first strike against the bombers' airfields could not obliterate the US's ability to retaliate by bomber.
In 1958, Valiant tankers in the UK were developed with one HDU mounted in the bomb-bay. Valiant tankers of 214 Squadron were used to demonstrate radius of action by refueling a Valiant bomber non-stop from UK to Singapore in 1960 and a Vulcan bomber to Australia in 1961. Other UK exercises involving refueling aircraft from Valiant tankers included Javelin and Lightning fighters, also Vulcan and Victor bombers. For instance, in 1962 a squadron of Javelin air defense aircraft was refueled in stages from the UK to India and back (exercise "Shiksha"). After the retirement of the Valiant in 1965, the Handley Page Victor took over the UK refueling role and had three hoses (HDUs). These were a fuselage-mounted HDU and a refueling pod on each wing. The center hose could refuel any probe-equipped aircraft, the wing pods could refuel the more maneuverable fighter/ground attack types.

A byproduct of this development effort and the building of large numbers of tankers was that these tankers were also available to refuel cargo aircraft, fighter aircraft, and ground attack aircraft, in addition to bombers, for ferrying to distant theaters of operations. This was much used during the Vietnam War, when many aircraft could not have covered the transoceanic distances without aerial refueling, even with intermediate bases such as Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii and Kadena Air Base, Okinawa. In addition to allowing the transport of the aircraft themselves, the cargo aircraft could also carry matériel, supplies, and personnel to Vietnam without landing to refuel. KC-135s were also frequently used for refueling of air combat missions from air bases in Thailand.
The USAF SR-71 Blackbird strategic reconnaissance aircraft made frequent use of air-to-air refueling. Indeed, design considerations of the aircraft made its mission impossible without aerial refueling. Based at Beale AFB in central California, SR-71s had to be forward-deployed to Europe and Japan prior to flying actual reconnaissance missions. These trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic flights during deployment were impossible without aerial refueling. The SR-71's designers traded takeoff performance for better high-speed, high-altitude performance, necessitating takeoff with less-than-full fuel tanks from even the longest runways. Once airborne, the Blackbird would accelerate to supersonic speed using afterburners to facilitate structural heating and expansion. The magnitude of temperature changes experienced by the SR-71, from parked to its maximum speed, resulted in significant expansion of its structural parts in cruise flight. To allow for the expansion, the Blackbird's parts had to fit loosely when cold, so loosely, in fact, that the Blackbird constantly leaked fuel before heating expanded the airframe enough to seal its fuel tanks. Following the supersonic dash the SR-71 would then rendezvous with a tanker to fill its now nearly empty tanks before proceeding on its mission. This was referred to as the LTTR (for "Launch To Tanker Rendezvous") profile. LTTR had the added advantage of providing an operational test of the Blackbird's refueling capability within minutes after takeoff, enabling a Return-To-Launch-Site abort capability if necessary. At its most efficient altitude and speed, the Blackbird was capable of flying for many hours without refueling. The SR-71 used a special fuel, JP-7, with a very high flash point to withstand the extreme skin temperatures generated during Mach 3+ cruise flight.[32] While JP-7 could be used by other aircraft, its burn characteristics posed problems in certain situations (such as high-altitude, emergency engine starts) that made it less than optimal for aircraft other than the SR-71.
Normally, all the fuel aboard a tanker aircraft may be either offloaded, or burned by the tanker as necessary. To make this possible, the KC-135 fuel system incorporated gravity draining and pumps to allow moving fuel from tank to tank depending on mission needs. Mixing JP-7 with JP-4 or Jet A, however, rendered it unsuitable for use by the SR-71, so the Air Force commissioned a specially modified KC-135 variant, the KC-135Q, which included changes to the fuel system and operating procedures preventing inadvertent inflight mixing of fuel intended for offload with fuel intended for use by the tanker. SR-71 aircraft were refueled exclusively by KC-135Q tankers.

Tactical
[edit]Tankers are considered "force multipliers", because they convey considerable tactical advantages. Primarily, aerial refueling adds to the combat radius of attack, fighter and bombers aircraft, and allows patrol aircraft to remain airborne longer, thereby reducing the number of aircraft necessary to accomplish a given mission. Aerial refueling can also mitigate basing issues that might otherwise place limitations on combat payload. Combat aircraft operating from airfields with shorter runways must limit their takeoff weight, which could mean a choice between range (fuel) and combat payload (munitions). Aerial refueling, however, eliminates many of these basing difficulties because a combat aircraft can take off with a full combat payload and refuel immediately.
Operational history
[edit]Cold War
[edit]Even as the first practical methods for aerial refueling were being developed, military planners had already envisioned what missions could be greatly enhanced by using such techniques. In the emerging Cold War climate of the late 1940s, the ability for bombers to perform increasingly long distance missions would enable targets to be struck even from air bases on a different continent. Thus, it became commonplace for nuclear-armed strategic bombers to be equipped with aerial refueling apparatus and for it to be used to facilitate long distance patrols.[33]
During the late 1950s, aerial refueling had become so prevalent amongst the bombers operated by the US Air Force's Strategic Air Command that many, such as the Convair B-58 Hustler, would operate largely or entirely out of bases in the continental United States while maintaining strategic reach.[33] This practice was promoted to address security concerns as well as diplomatic objections from some overseas states that did not want nuclear weapons kept on their soil.[33] In one early demonstration of the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress's global reach, performed between 16 and 18 January 1957, three B-52Bs made a non-stop flight around the world during Operation Power Flite, during which 24,325 miles (21,145 nmi, 39,165 km) was covered in 45 hours 19 minutes (536.8 smph) with multiple in-flight refuelings being performed from KC-97s.[34][35]
While development of the Avro Vulcan strategic bomber was underway, British officials recognised that its operational flexibility could be improved by the provision of in-flight refueling equipment.[36] Accordingly, from the 16th aircraft to be completed onwards, the Vulcan was furnished with in-flight refueling receiving equipment.[37][38] While continuous airborne patrols were flown by the RAF for a time, these were deemed to be untenable, and the refueling mechanisms across the Vulcan fleet largely fell into disuse during the 1960s.[38] When the RAF chose to optimise its bomber fleet away from high-altitude flight and towards low-level penetration missions, bombers such as the Handley Page Victor were fitted with aerial refueling probes and additional fuel tanks to counter the decreased range from the shift in flight profile.[39][40]
During the mid-1950s, to deliver France's independent nuclear deterrent, work commenced on what would become the Dassault Mirage IV supersonic bomber.[41][42] The dimensions of this bomber was greatly determined by the viability of aerial refueling, with work on an enlarged variant of the Mirage IV ultimately being aborted in favour of a greater reliance upon aerial tanker aircraft instead.[43] In order to refuel the Mirage IVA fleet, France purchased 14 (12 plus 2 spares) US Boeing C-135F tankers.[41] Mirage IVAs also often operated in pairs, with one aircraft carrying a weapon and the other carrying fuel tanks and a buddy refueling pack, allowing it to refuel its partner en route to the target.[44] While able to strike at numerous targets inside of the Soviet Union, the inability for the Mirage IV to return from some missions had been a point of controversy during the aircraft's design phase.[45][46]
Korean War
[edit]On 6 July 1951, the first combat air refueling of fighter-type aircraft took place over Korea. Three RF-80As launched from Taegu with the modified tip-tanks and rendezvoused with a tanker offshore of Wonsan, North Korea. Through in-flight refueling, the RF-80s effectively doubled their range, which enabled them to photograph valuable targets in North Korea.[47][48]
Vietnam War
[edit]
During the Vietnam War, it was common for USAF fighter-bombers flying from Thailand to North Vietnam to refuel from KC-135s en route to their target. Besides extending their range, this enabled the F-105s and F-4 Phantoms to carry more bombs and rockets. Tankers were also available for refueling on the way back if necessary. In addition to ferrying aircraft across the Pacific Ocean, aerial refueling made it possible for battle-damaged fighters, with heavily leaking fuel tanks, to hook up to the tankers and let the tanker feed its engine(s) until the point where they could glide to the base and land. This saved numerous aircraft. [citation needed]
The US Navy frequently used carrier-based aerial tankers like the KA-3 Skywarrior to refuel Navy and Marine aircraft such as the F-4, A-4 Skyhawk, A-6 Intruder, and A-7 Corsair II. This was particularly useful when a pilot returning from an airstrike was having difficulty landing and was running low on jet fuel. This gave them fuel for more attempts at landing for a successful "trap" on an aircraft carrier. The KA-3 could also refuel fighters on extended Combat Air Patrol. USMC jets based in South Vietnam and Thailand also used USMC KC-130 Hercules transports for air-to-air refueling on missions.
During late August 1970, a pair of HH-53C helicopters performed the first Trans-Pacific flight by a helicopter, flying from Eglin AFB in Florida to Danang in South Vietnam. In addition to making multiple en route stops to refuel on the ground, aerial refueling was also used in this display of the type's long-range capabilities. The flight proved to be roughly four times faster than the traditional dispatching of rotorcraft to the theatre by ship.[49]
Middle East
[edit]During the 1980s Iran–Iraq War, the Iranian Air Force maintained at least one KC 707-3J9C aerial tanker, which the Islamic Republic had inherited from the Shah's government. This was used most effectively on 4 April 1981, refueling eight IRIAF F-4 Phantoms on long-range sorties into Iraq to bomb the H-3 Al Walid airfield near the Jordanian border, destroying 27–50 Iraqi fighter jets and bombers.[50][51] However, the Iranian Air Force was forced to cancel its 180-day air offensive and attempts to control Iranian airspace due to unsustainable rates of attrition.[52][53]
The Israeli Air Force has a fleet of Boeing 707s equipped with a boom refueling system similar to the KC-135, this system has the Israeli name Ram, used to refuel and extend the range of fighter bombers such as the F-15I and F-16I for deterrent and strike missions, they are nearing 60 years old and Israel does not disclose the number of tankers in their fleet.[54][55][56] In 1985, Israeli F-15s used heavily modified Boeing 707 aircraft to provide aerial refueling over the Mediterranean Sea in order to extend their range for Operation Wooden Leg, an air raid on the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) near Tunis, Tunisia, that necessitated a 2,000 km flight.[57] As of 2021 Israel has ordered four of a planned eight Boeing KC-46 Pegasus boom refueling tankers and has requested that the first two aircraft be fast-tracked for delivery in 2022 when they were to be delivered in 2023. The Jerusalem Post reports that Israeli commanders have made this request to enhance the strategic deterrence against Iran, the same article reports that the US, whose air force is also taking its first deliveries of the aircraft type, has refused to move forward the deliveries while supporting Israel's deterrence; the Jpost editor writing "The US State Department approved the possible sale of up to eight KC-46 tanker aircraft and related equipment to Israel for an estimated cost of $2.4 billion last March(i.e. 5/2020), marking the first time that Washington has allowed Jerusalem to buy new tankers."[56]
Falklands War
[edit]During the Falklands War, aerial refueling played a vital role in all of the successful Argentine attacks against the Royal Navy. The Argentine Air Force had only two KC-130H Hercules available and they were used to refuel both Air Force and Navy A-4 Skyhawks and Navy Super Etendards in their Exocet strikes. The Hercules on several occasions approached the islands (where the Sea Harriers were in patrol) to search and guide the A-4s in their returning flights. On one of those flights (callsign Jaguar) one of the KC-130s went to rescue a damaged A-4 and delivered 39,000 lb (18,000 kg) of fuel while carrying it to its airfield at San Julian. However, the Mirage IIIs and Daggers lack of air refueling capability prevented them from achieving better results. The Mirages were unable to reach the islands with a strike payload, and the Daggers could do so only for a five-minute strike flight.
On the British side, air refueling was carried out by the Handley Page Victor K.2 and, after the Argentine surrender, by modified C-130 Hercules tankers. These aircraft aided deployments from the UK to the Ascension Island staging post in the Atlantic and further deployments south of bomber, transport and maritime patrol aircraft.[58] The most famous refueling missions were the 8,000 nmi (15,000 km) "Operation Black Buck" sorties which used 14 Victor tankers to allow an Avro Vulcan bomber (with a flying reserve bomber) to attack the Argentine-captured airfield at Port Stanley on the Falkland Islands. With all the aircraft flying from Ascension, the tankers themselves needed refueling.[59][60][61] The raids were the longest-range bombing raids in history until surpassed by the Boeing B-52s flying from the States to bomb Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War and later B-2 flights.[62]
Gulf War
[edit]During the time of Operation Desert Shield, the military buildup to the Persian Gulf War, US Air Force Boeing KC-135s & McDonnell Douglas KC-10As, and USMC KC-130 Hercules aircraft were deployed to forward air bases in England, Diego Garcia, and Saudi Arabia. Aircraft stationed in Saudi Arabia normally maintained an orbit in the Saudi–Iraqi neutral zone, informally known as "Frisbee", and refueled coalition aircraft whenever necessary. Two side by side tracks over central Saudi Arabia called "Prune" and "Raisin" featured 2–4 basket equipped KC-135 tankers each and were used by Navy aircraft from the Red Sea Battle Force. Large Navy strike groups from the Red Sea would send A-6 tankers to the Prune and Raisin tracks ahead of the strike aircraft arriving to top off and take up station to the right of the Air Force tankers thereby providing an additional tanking point. RAF Handley Page Victor and Vickers VC10 tankers were also used to refuel British and coalition aircraft and were popular with the US Navy for their docile basket behavior and having three point refueling stations. An additional track was maintained close to the northwest border for the E-3 AWACS aircraft and any Navy aircraft needing emergency fuel. These 24-hour air-refueling zones enabled the intense air campaign during Desert Storm. An additional 24/7 tanker presence was maintained over the Red Sea itself to refuel Navy F-14 Tomcats maintaining Combat Air Patrol tracks. During the conflict's final week, KC-10s moved inside Iraq to support barrier CAP missions set up to block Iraqi fighters from escaping to Iran.

On 16–17 January 1991, the first combat sortie of Operation Desert Storm, and the longest combat sortie in history at that time, was launched from Barksdale AFB, Louisiana. Seven B-52Gs flew a thirty-five-hour mission to the region and back to launch 35 Boeing Air Launched Cruise Missiles (ALCMs) with the surprise use of conventional warheads. This attack, which successfully destroyed 85–95 percent of intended targets, would have been impossible without the support of refueling tankers.[63][64]
An extremely useful tanker in Desert Storm was the USAF's KC-10A Extender. Besides being larger than the other tankers deployed, the KC-10A is equipped with the USAF "boom" refueling and also the "hose-and-drogue" system, enabling it to refuel not only USAF aircraft, and also USMC and US Navy jets that use the "probe-and-drogue" system, and also allied aircraft, such as those from the UK and Saudi Arabia. KC-135s may be equipped with a drogue depending on the mission profile. With a full jet fuel load, the KC-10A is capable of flying from a base on the American east coast, flying nonstop to Europe, transferring a considerable amount of fuel to other aircraft, and returning to its home base without landing anywhere else.[citation needed]
On 24 January 1991, the Iraqi Air Force launched the Attack on Ras Tanura, an attempt to bomb the Ras Tanura oil facility in Saudi Arabia. On their way to the target, the Iraqi attack aircraft were refueled by tanker at an altitude of 100 meters. The attack ultimately failed, with two aircraft turning back and the remaining two shot down.[65][66]
Centennial Contact
[edit]On 27 June 2023 the United States Air Force, including the Air National Guard, commemorated the 100-year anniversary of the first aerial refueling by holding "Operation Centennial Contact." Aircraft from various bases conducted aerial refueling exercises across the United States, as well as conducting flyovers in 50 states.[67] 152 aircraft were slated to participate in the operation, with 82 tanker aircraft providing refueling support to 70 other participating aircraft.[68]
The aircraft participating included 49 Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker; 29 Boeing KC-46 Pegasus; four McDonnell Douglas KC-10 Extenders, and aircraft receiving fuel included 21 Lockheed C-130 Hercules; 13 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III; ten McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle; eight Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor; six Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II; five General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcons; four Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II; two Boeing B-52 Stratofortresses; and one Lockheed C-5 Galaxy. [68]
Helicopters
[edit]Helicopter in-flight refueling (HIFR) is a variation of aerial refueling when a naval helicopter approaches a warship (not necessarily suited for landing operations) and receives fuel through the cabin while hovering. Alternatively, some helicopters like the HH-60 Pave Hawk are equipped with a probe extending out the front can be refueled from a drogue-equipped tanker aircraft in a similar manner to fixed-wing aircraft by matching a high forward speed for a helicopter to a slow speed for the fixed-wing tanker.
Longest crewed flight record
[edit]A mission modified Cessna 172 Skyhawk with a crew of two set the world record for the longest continuous crewed flight without landing of 64 days, 22 hours, 19 minutes, and five seconds in 1958. A Ford truck was outfitted with a fuel pump, tank, and other paraphernalia required to support the aircraft in flight. The publicity flight for a Las Vegas area hotel ended when the aircraft's performance had degraded to the point where the Cessna had difficulty climbing away from the refueling vehicle.[69][70]
Developments
[edit]- Commercial tankers are occasionally used by military forces. The Omega Aerial Refueling Services company[71] and Metrea Strategic Mobility[72] are contracted by the US Navy. In June 2023, Metrea completed the first commercial refueling of the US Air Force.[73]
- Autonomous (hands off) refueling using probe/drogue systems was investigated by NASA, potentially for use by unmanned aerial vehicles in the KQ-X program.[74]
Operators
[edit]




See also
[edit]- Military logistics
- Propellant depot
- Underway replenishment, the transfer of refuel and stores at sea
- List of tanker aircraft
Notes
[edit]- ^ "AAR" can also stand for After Action Review (i.e. debriefing); "IFR" also stands for Instrument Flight Rules.
References
[edit]Citations
[edit]- ^ Nangia, R.K (November 2006). "Operations and aircraft design towards greener civil aviation using air-to-air refuelling" (PDF). The Aeronautical Journal. Paper No. 3088. (November): 705–721. doi:10.1017/S0001924000001585. S2CID 114942345. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 October 2013. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
- ^ Colin Cruddas, Highways to the Empire (Air Britain, 2006, ISBN 0-85130-376-5); G.H. Pirie, Air Empire: British Imperial Civil Aviation, 1919–39 (Manchester University Press, 2009), Chapter 6. ISBN 978-0-7190-4111-2; G.H. Pirie, Cultures and Caricatures of British imperial Aviation: Passengers, Pilots, Publicity (Manchester University Press, 2012), Chapter 4.
- ^ There is no evidence of a relationship between A.D. Hunter and the Hunter brothers.
- ^ "National Air and Space Museum image". Archived from the original on 16 April 2009.
- ^ a b History of Aviation, Part 19, 1938
- ^ Hearst Magazines (February 1931). "Wings Across The Atlantic". Popular Mechanics. Hearst Magazines. p. 190. Archived from the original on 13 March 2023. Retrieved 4 June 2016.
- ^ Flight Magazine archive, 10 January 1929
- ^ Flight Magazine archive, 3 July 1931, p. 623
- ^ Richard K. Smith. "Seventy Five Years of Inflight Refueling" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 August 2017. Retrieved 1 October 2013.
- ^ "Mid-air refuelling in Gander". Archived from the original on 24 March 2017. Retrieved 4 October 2013.
- ^ Bonnier Corporation (January 1947). "Gas Station In The Sky". Popular Science. Bonnier Corporation. p. 2.
- ^ "Refuelling In Flight" , Flight Magazine, November 22, 1945 Archived 5 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine close-up drawing of receiver pawl grapnel and tanker haul line projectile
- ^ "flight march – receiver aircraft – advertisements flight – 1947 – 0392 – Flight Archive". Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ Note – on one flight there was a high westerly wind and no need for aerial refueling
- ^ "imperial airways – 1940 – 1219 – Flight Archive". Archived from the original on 5 October 2013. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ Bonnier Corporation (August 1948). "What Can Our Bombers Do Now?". Popular Science. Bonnier Corporation. p. 79. Archived from the original on 13 March 2023. Retrieved 4 June 2016.
- ^ "flight – lucky lady – flight refuelling – 1949 – 0461 – Flight Archive". Archived from the original on 21 August 2016. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ "B-50s In Great Britain" , Flight magazine, 1 September 1949
- ^ Hallex, Steve. "Around the World in 94 Hours*". Logbook. 14 (1, 1st Quarter 2016).
- ^ "Cobham 75 :: Air-to-Air Refuelling Takes off". Archived from the original on 8 July 2011. Retrieved 17 November 2009.
- ^ Bonnier Corporation (October 1949). "Jet Refuels Like Humming Bird". Popular Science. Bonnier Corporation. p. 131. Archived from the original on 13 March 2023. Retrieved 16 May 2019.
- ^ "Meteor's 12-hour Flight", Flight, 1949, archived from the original on 8 July 2017, retrieved 13 April 2014
- ^ "50 Years of Probe and Drogue Flight Refuelling cover signed Air Chief Marshal Sir Michael Knight KCB AFC FRAES". Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ "KC-30A MRTT". airforce.gov.au. Retrieved 30 August 2024.
- ^ a b Naval Air Systems Command (1 August 2006). A1-F18AC-NFM-000 Naval Aviation Training and Operating Procedures Standardization (NATOPS) Manual. United States Department of the Navy. p. 364.
- ^ "Inflight Refueling". Zvezda JSC. Archived from the original on 16 August 2007. Retrieved 6 July 2021.
- ^ Cordesman & Kleiber 2007, p. 158.
- ^ Maj. Marck R. Cobb, "Aerial Refueling: The Need for a Multipoint, Dual-System Capability," AU-ARI-CP-87-3, Air University Press, July 1987.
- ^ note – even today there is much confusion about how this system actually worked
- ^ Christopher, Bolkcom; D., Klaus, Jon (11 May 2005). "Air Force Aerial Refueling Methods: Flying Boom versus Hose-and-Drogue". Digital Library. Archived from the original on 11 May 2009. Retrieved 27 October 2017.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Canadian military unable to refuel new jets in mid-air". Macleans.ca. 31 January 2011. Archived from the original on 14 June 2015. Retrieved 13 June 2015.
- ^ "Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird". Archived from the original on 17 March 2010. Retrieved 8 February 2014.
- ^ a b c Farley, Robert (10 June 2016). "The B-58 Hustler: America's Cold War Nuclear Bomber Blunder". nationalinterest.org. Archived from the original on 23 April 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
- ^ Condor 1994, p. 42.
- ^ Knaack 1988, p. 243.
- ^ Wynn 1997, p. 154.
- ^ Wynn 1997, p. 155.
- ^ a b Brookes and Davey 2009, p. 49.
- ^ Rodwell Flight 13 February 1964, p. 241.
- ^ Windle and Bowman 2009, p. 21.
- ^ a b Gunston 1973, p. 104.
- ^ Gunston and Gilchrist 1993, p. 196.
- ^ Gunston 1973, p. 109.
- ^ Gunston and Gilchrist 1993, p. 200.
- ^ Dumoulin, André, "La dissuasion nucléaire française en posture méditerranéenne" (PDF), Les Cahiers du RMES, II (1): 5–12, archived from the original (PDF) on 13 March 2012, retrieved 18 October 2010,
(p. 5) Certes, la posture méditerranéenne ne pouvait totalement résoudre la question de l'autonomie après le largage de la bombe à gravité AN-21 puis AN-22, et il était imaginé, au pire, des vols «kamikaze» jusqu'aux cibles russes mais également des profils de vols de retour avec planification des zones de crash, avec l'abandon de l'équipage au-dessus de territoires alliés.
- ^ Gunston and Gilchrist 1993, pp. 196–197.
- ^ "History of aerial refueling: Fueling the fighters". Air Mobility Command. United States Air Mobility Command. 15 April 2009. Archived from the original on 5 October 2017. Retrieved 6 July 2021.
- ^ "First USAF Flight Refueling in Combat". Archived from the original on 11 April 2017. Retrieved 6 December 2020.
- ^ "S-65/H-53A/D Sea Stallion/ H-53E Super Stallion". sikorskyarchives.com. Archived from the original on 23 March 2022. Retrieved 28 March 2021.
- ^ "Assault on Al-Wallid". Imperial Iraniasn Air Force. Archived from the original on 11 October 2017. Retrieved 9 September 2012.
- ^ Nadimi, Farzin. F-4 Phantom. Air Forces Monthly Special, ISBN 0-946219-46-X. p. 77.
- ^ Cordesman, Anthony. "Lessons of Modern Warfare: The Iran Iraq War Chapter V" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 September 2009. Retrieved 4 May 2013.
- ^ Cooper, Tom. "Bombed by Blinders Part 1". Archived from the original on 6 October 2014. Retrieved 20 April 2013.
- ^ Israeli Air Force (10 October 2013). "תדלוק אווירי". Archived from the original on 7 November 2021. Retrieved 19 November 2016 – via YouTube.
- ^ "Israel's First Strike on Iran's Nuclear Facilities – Part 1 - Defense Media Network". Archived from the original on 20 November 2016. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ a b "US rejects Israeli request for tanker aircraft as Iran plans advance". 13 December 2021. Archived from the original on 13 December 2021. Retrieved 13 December 2021.
- ^ Bergman 2018, p. 306.
- ^ "The Falkland Islands: A history of the 1982 conflict." Royal Air Force, 29 April 2010. Archived 18 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Darling 2007, pp. 116–117.
- ^ Kev Darling, RAR Illustrated: Avro Vulcan Part 1, Big Bird Publications 2007, ISBN 978-1-84799-237-6 (p.119)
- ^ "Narrative of RAF Contribution to the Falklands Campaign." The National Archives, Retrieved: 20 April 2014.
- ^ Bull 2004, p. 84.
- ^ "Factsheets: 2nd Bomb Wing History". Barksdale Air Force Base. United States Air Force. Archived from the original on 26 September 2009. Retrieved 19 September 2011.
- ^ Boeing B-52 evolves again with guided weapons launcher Archived 20 August 2019 at the Wayback Machine – Flightglobal.com, 15 January 2016
- ^ Woods, Kevin (May 2008). Iraqi Perspectives Project Phase II Um Al-Ma'arik (The Mother of All Battles): Operational and Strategic Insights from an Iraqi Perspective (First ed.). Institute for Defense Analysis. p. 199.
- ^ Francoma, Rick (1999). Ally to Adversary: An Eyewitness Account of Iraq's Fall From Grace. Naval Institute Press. p. 106. ISBN 1557502811.
- ^ "AMC celebrates 100th year of air refueling with community flyovers across the US". af.mil. Air Mobility Command Public Affairs. 25 June 2023. Retrieved 25 June 2023.
- ^ a b "Wild blue yonder: Air Force refueling flyover event visible in Southern Utah". St George News. 26 June 2023. Retrieved 27 June 2023.
- ^ "The Plane that Flew for 62 Days and the T-Bird that Saved the Day". 29 July 2008. Archived from the original on 20 November 2016. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ "Endurance Test, Circa 1958". 3 January 2008. Archived from the original on 5 April 2016. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ "Omega Air Refueling". Archived from the original on 12 May 2015. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ "Metrea Strategic Mobility". Metrea. Archived from the original on 31 January 2023. Retrieved 31 January 2023.
- ^ Trevithick, Joseph (12 July 2023). "Private Aerial Refueling Tanker Has Gassed Up An Air Force Plane For The First Time". The Drive. Retrieved 16 July 2023.
- ^ "Ares". Archived from the original on 23 February 2012. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag "World Air Forces 2020". Flightglobal Insight. 2020. Archived from the original on 10 December 2019. Retrieved 1 April 2020.
- ^ Jennings, Greg (14 January 2020). "Egypt demonstrates aerial refuelling for combat aircraft". Janes.com. Archived from the original on 6 September 2020. Retrieved 6 July 2021.
- ^ McLaughlin, Andrew (22 January 2018). "Indonesia seeks new heavy air refuelling tanker". ABDR. Archived from the original on 3 April 2018. Retrieved 6 July 2021.
- ^ Sharma, Soumya (17 October 2022). "Portuguese Air Force's first KC-390 aircraft arrives in Portugal". Airforce Technology. Retrieved 16 September 2023.
Bibliography
[edit]- Bull, Stephen. Encyclopedia of Military Technology And Innovation. Santa Barbara, California: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004. ISBN 978-1-57356-557-8.
- Brookes, Andrew and Chris Davey. Vulcan Units of The Cold War (Osprey Combat Aircraft: 72). Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing, 2009. ISBN 978-1-84603-297-4.
- Condor, Albert E. Air Force Gunners (AFGA): The Men Behind the Guns, The History of Enlisted Aerial Gunnery, 1917–1991. Nashville, Tennessee: Turner Publishing, 1994. ISBN 978-1-56311-167-9.
- Darling, Kev. Avro Vulcan, Part One (RAF Illustrated). Vale of Glamorgan Wales, UK: Big Bird Aviation Publication, 2007. ISBN 978-1-84799-237-6.
- Gardner, Brian (1984). "Flight Refuelling... The Wartime Story". Air Enthusiast. No. 25. pp. 34–43, 80. ISSN 0143-5450.
- Gunston, Bill. Bombers of the West. New York: Charles Scribner's and Sons; 1973. ISBN 0-7110-0456-0.
- Gunston, Bill and Peter Gilchrist. Jet Bombers: From the Messerschmitt Me 262 to the Stealth B-2. Osprey, 1993. ISBN 1-85532-258-7.
- Knaack, Marcelle Size. Post-World War II Bombers, 1945–1973. Washington, D.C.: Office of Air Force History, 1988. ISBN 978-0-16-002260-9.
- Rodwell, Robert R. "The Steel in the Blue: Last Week's Glimpse of the V-force". Flight, 13 February 1964, pp. 241–245.
- Windle, Dave and Martin Bowman. V Bombers: Vulcan, Valiant and Victor, Casemate Publishers, 2009. ISBN 1-84415-827-6.
- Wynn, Humphrey. RAF Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Forces: Origins, Roles and Deployment 1946–1969. London: The Stationery Office, 1997. ISBN 0-11-772833-0.
- Cordesman, Anthony H.; Kleiber, Martin (2007). Chinese Military Modernization: Force Development and Strategic Capabilities. CSIS. p. 158. ISBN 978-0-89206-496-0.
- Bergman, Ronen (30 January 2018). Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel's Targeted Assassinations. Random House Publishing Group. p. 306. ISBN 978-0-679-60468-6.
External links
[edit]- Photo aerial tanking 1929
- Aerial tanking history
- Airborne rearming, a comprehensive article with video.
- Aerial Refueling on APA
- Air Refueling Systems Advisory Group
- Twenty-one Years of Flight Refuelling, a 1955 Flight article on the development of Flight Refuelling Ltd's refueling method.
- World's best aerial refueling aircraft
- Tac Tankers Association
- Airlift/Tankers Association Archived 25 June 2022 at the Wayback Machine
Aerial refueling
View on GrokipediaHistorical Development
Early Experiments and Concepts
The concept of aerial refueling emerged in the early 1920s as military aviators sought to extend aircraft endurance beyond the limitations of fuel capacity, primarily through manual hose transfer methods. Initial experiments involved simple gravity-fed hoses trailed from a donor aircraft to a receiver, often requiring precise formation flying and crew intervention to connect and transfer fuel. These efforts were driven by the U.S. Army Air Service's interest in demonstrating prolonged flight capabilities for potential long-range missions and record-setting.[7][8] The first successful aerial refueling occurred on June 27, 1923, over Rockwell Field in San Diego, California, when two Airco DH-4B biplanes participated in the demonstration. In the tanker aircraft, Lieutenants Virgil S. Hine and Frank W. Seifert lowered a hose to the receiver piloted by Lieutenants Lowell H. Smith and John P. Richter, transferring approximately five gallons of gasoline while both planes flew at about 70 miles per hour. This milestone built on prior informal attempts, such as a 1921 wing-walking fuel transfer, but marked the first use of a fuel line between aircraft. The technique enabled Smith and Richter to achieve a world endurance record of 37 hours and 25 minutes on August 27, 1923, after multiple refuelings totaling over 500 gallons.[7][9][2] Early trials highlighted significant risks, including a fatal accident on November 18, 1923, during an airshow at Kelly Field, Texas, where Lieutenants Erwin R. Stevens (as "Captain Stoney") and Leland C. Wagner collided while attempting refueling, resulting in both aircraft crashing and the pilots' deaths. Despite such hazards, the experiments validated the feasibility of in-flight fuel transfer using rudimentary systems. In Britain, Flight Lieutenant Richard Atcherley developed a looped-hose method in 1934, where a hose was trailed between two aircraft flying in trail formation, facilitating transfers for RAF fighters to extend ferry ranges across the Atlantic. These pre-World War II concepts laid the groundwork for more reliable refueling technologies, though practical implementation remained limited by aircraft stability, hose management, and safety concerns.[8][10]World War II Era Innovations
During World War II, aerial refueling remained largely experimental, with efforts focused on extending fighter and bomber ranges amid escalating demands for long-distance operations, though no systems achieved operational combat use due to technical challenges, safety risks, and resource priorities. The United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) initiated trials in 1943 at Eglin Field, Florida, employing a modified B-24D Liberator as a tanker to gravity-feed fuel to a B-17E Flying Fortress receiver via a hose, successfully transferring approximately 1,500 gallons over 18 minutes in initial tests.[11] These experiments aimed to support Pacific theater strikes against Japan by enabling heavier bomb loads or extended radii, but instability in formation flying and hookup reliability limited scalability.[12] Earlier USAAF tests that year also involved a B-24 suspending an external fuel tank from a cable, which a P-38 Lightning fighter attempted to grapple mid-air using a receptacle on its wing, demonstrating feasibility for single-engine fighters but highlighting hazards like entanglement and fuel spillage.[12] The USAAF collaborated with civilian contractors to refine these grappling-hook and looped-hose concepts, inherited from interwar developments, yet wartime production demands precluded widespread adoption, confining innovations to proof-of-concept validations that informed post-war systems.[10] In Britain, Flight Refuelling Limited (FRL), established in 1934 by aviator Sir Alan Cobham, advanced the looped-hose method—where a trailing hose formed a loop for the receiver to snag—which had proven viable pre-war for refueling Imperial Airways' Short Empire flying boats on transatlantic routes by 1939 using Handley Page Harrow tankers.[13] During the war, the Royal Air Force (RAF) explored adapting this for fighter escorts, such as Mosquitoes, to counter range limitations in escorting bombers over Europe, but production of specialized equipment and crew training were deprioritized amid immediate threats like the Battle of Britain and strategic bombing campaigns.[14] FRL's probe-and-drogue precursor innovations laid groundwork for reliable transfers at relative speeds up to 200 mph, though RAF trials emphasized safety over volume, transferring modest fuel quantities without achieving tactical integration.[15] Axis powers conducted limited trials; the Luftwaffe tested drogue-style refueling on multi-engine aircraft like the Junkers Ju 290 in 1942–1943 to extend maritime patrol ranges, using rigid couplers for hose connections, but fuel transfer rates and formation stability proved inadequate for frontline deployment amid resource shortages.[16] These WWII-era efforts collectively validated core principles—rigid boom precursors, flexible hoses, and contact methods—but causal constraints like aerodynamic turbulence, ignition risks from spills, and the need for precise pilot coordination underscored why innovations matured only after the war, when dedicated tankers and electronics enabled routine operations.[8]Post-War Maturation and Cold War Expansion
Following World War II, aerial refueling matured through demonstration flights proving its strategic viability. On March 2, 1949, the U.S. Air Force B-50 Superfortress Lucky Lady II completed the first non-stop circumnavigation of the globe, covering approximately 24,000 miles in 94 hours and 1 minute, sustained by four in-flight refuelings using the looped-hose method from KB-29M tankers of the 43rd Air Refueling Squadron.[17][18] This mission, originating from Carswell Air Force Base, Texas, highlighted refueling's potential to extend bomber range for intercontinental operations, with tankers positioned at bases in the Azores, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines.[19] The success validated post-war investments in tanker modifications, transitioning from wartime hose-and-drogue experiments to reliable strategic tools.[14] By 1950, the flying boom system, developed by Boeing, supplanted the hose method, enabling more precise fuel transfer in adverse weather, darkness, and higher speeds.[10] This advancement facilitated rapid transatlantic flights, such as Colonel David Schilling's 10-hour, 8-minute journey from California to Germany in October 1950 using aerial refueling.[14] The KB-29 and later KB-50 tankers equipped three bombardment wings by late 1950, integrating refueling into U.S. Strategic Air Command (SAC) doctrine for nuclear deterrence.[8] During the Cold War, aerial refueling expanded dramatically under SAC to support global strike capabilities amid escalating tensions with the Soviet Union. The KC-97 Stratofreighter, a piston-engine tanker derived from the C-97, entered service in 1950, refueling jet bombers like the B-47 and early B-52s, and forming the backbone of SAC's tanker force through the 1950s.[20] By the mid-1950s, SAC amassed hundreds of KC-97s, enabling non-stop missions and airborne alerts that projected U.S. power worldwide without forward basing dependencies.[21] The jet-age transition accelerated with the KC-135 Stratotanker's introduction; its prototype flew on August 31, 1956, and it achieved initial operational capability in 1957, replacing the KC-97 fleet by the early 1960s.[22] Over 700 KC-135s were produced, providing sustained refueling for B-52 Stratofortresses and other assets, which extended effective range to intercontinental distances and underpinned SAC's 24/7 alert posture.[22] General Curtis LeMay's emphasis on refueling integration transformed SAC bombers into true global deterrents, with operations like 1957's around-the-world B-52 flights demonstrating nonstop endurance via multiple KC-135 hookups.[21] This expansion not only matured refueling tactics but also institutionalized it as essential for Cold War aerial supremacy, influencing allied programs and tanker deployments across Europe, Asia, and the Pacific.[8]Refueling Systems and Technologies
Flying Boom Mechanism
The flying boom mechanism utilizes a rigid, telescoping tube extended from the tanker aircraft, which a boom operator maneuvers into a fixed receptacle on the receiving aircraft to enable fuel transfer. The operator, positioned in a dedicated station within the tanker, employs control surfaces on the boom—rudders, elevators, and later fly-by-wire systems—to achieve precise alignment amid relative motion between aircraft.[23] This method contrasts with flexible hose systems by providing operator-directed control rather than relying on the receiver's pilot for connection.[23] Developed by Boeing engineers in 1948 to overcome the limitations of hose-and-drogue systems for high-speed jet operations, the flying boom addressed needs articulated by Strategic Air Command for efficient refueling of bombers like the B-47 and B-52. Initial dry rigging tests occurred in summer 1948, followed by flight demonstrations, with the first equipped KB-29 tanker operational by fall 1950, supporting three bombardment wings.[24] [8] The system transitioned to the KC-97 Stratotanker in 1950 and became standard on the KC-135 by 1957, facilitating non-stop global strikes during the Cold War.[25] Key advantages include fuel transfer rates up to 6,000 pounds per minute, significantly exceeding hose-and-drogue capacities of 1,500–2,000 pounds per minute, which minimizes refueling time for large receivers like strategic bombers.[23] However, it supports only one aircraft at a time, demands highly skilled operators, and proves less adaptable for fighters or smaller platforms due to receptacle size and stability requirements.[23] Modern iterations, as on the KC-46 Pegasus, incorporate digital controls for enhanced precision and reduced operator workload, though early analog systems relied on manual flying akin to piloting a tail.[23] The U.S. Air Force predominantly employs the flying boom for its strategic fleet, with limited adoption by allies; interoperability challenges persist, often necessitating adapters for probe-equipped aircraft.[23] Safety protocols emphasize stable formation flying, typically at 250–300 knots indicated airspeed, with disconnect mechanisms to avert collisions from boom strikes.[23]Probe-and-Drogue Approach
The probe-and-drogue system employs a rigid, telescoping probe mounted on the receiving aircraft, which the pilot maneuvers to insert into a drogue—a funnel-shaped receptacle attached to the end of a flexible fuel hose trailed from the tanker aircraft.[26] Once connected, fuel flows through the hose under pressure, with the drogue providing aerodynamic stability and guiding the probe into position.[27] This method originated as an alternative to rigid boom systems, particularly suited for carrier-based operations and smaller aircraft where precise alignment is challenging.[28] Development of the probe-and-drogue approach began in the late 1940s, with British engineer Sir Alan Cobham conducting early trials and formalizing the system by 1950 through his company Flight Refuelling Ltd.[29] The U.S. Navy adopted it for its fighter aircraft, recognizing its compatibility with shipboard recoveries and the ability to equip tankers with multiple underwing pods for simultaneous refueling of several receivers.[8] By the 1950s, the system saw operational use in trials with aircraft like the Grumman F9F Panther, enabling extended naval strike capabilities without reliance on skilled boom operators.[8] Technical specifications include hoses typically 60-100 feet long, with drogues featuring stabilizing fins to maintain position amid turbulence, and probes designed to extend 2-4 feet for final insertion.[30] Fuel transfer rates are generally lower than those of flying boom systems, often around 1,000-2,000 pounds per minute per hose, necessitating longer connection times for large receivers but allowing multi-point operations on tankers like the KC-130 or A330 MRTT.[31] Advantages include greater flexibility for diverse aircraft types, including helicopters and unmanned systems, as the passive drogue requires minimal tanker-side adjustments, though it demands higher pilot skill for probe insertion under dynamic conditions.[28] Disadvantages encompass reduced flow efficiency and potential hose whip from wind, increasing disconnection risks in adverse weather.[31] The system is employed by the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force special operations, as well as most NATO allies and nations operating European-designed fighters such as the Rafale, Typhoon, and Gripen, which are probe-equipped.[28] Internationally, countries including the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Australia, and Canada integrate probe-and-drogue on their tankers for interoperability, with adaptations like buddy pods enabling fighters to serve as temporary tankers.[32] Ongoing advancements focus on automated docking and vision systems to mitigate human error, as demonstrated in U.S. Navy tests with unmanned receivers.[33]Adapter and Hybrid Configurations
Adapter configurations in aerial refueling primarily facilitate interoperability between the flying boom and probe-and-drogue systems. The Boom Drogue Adapter (BDA), for example, attaches to the end of a boom on tankers like the KC-135 Stratotanker, converting it to deliver fuel via a drogue to probe-equipped receivers. This ground-installed modification allows the boom operator to maneuver the drogue toward the receiver's probe, though it operates at lower fuel transfer rates—typically around 900 gallons per minute—compared to the boom's standard 1,200 gallons per minute capacity due to hose drag and reduced rigidity.[34][30] Hybrid configurations integrate both refueling methods on a single platform, enhancing flexibility for mixed receiver fleets. The McDonnell Douglas KC-10 Extender, operational since 1981, exemplifies this approach with a rear-mounted flying boom for high-flow refueling of receptacle aircraft and two underwing pods each deploying a hose-and-drogue system for probe receivers, enabling simultaneous or sequential support for up to four aircraft.[35][36] This dual capability has been critical in operations requiring rapid adaptation to diverse aircraft types, such as U.S. Air Force and allied fighters and bombers. The Boeing KC-46 Pegasus, entering service in 2019, similarly features a digital boom and a centerline hose-and-drogue receptacle, allowing it to refuel both boom-compatible and probe-equipped aircraft at rates up to 1,200 gallons per minute via boom.[37] Recent developments emphasize modular hybrid pods for broader application, including on fighters and unmanned systems. The U.S. Air Force's Small Hybrid Aerial Refueling Kit (SHARK), under development since 2024, comprises platform-agnostic pods housing compact boom or drogue mechanisms, enabling non-traditional tankers like F-15s or drones to perform refueling with minimal structural modifications.[38][39] These systems aim to address high-threat environments by distributing refueling assets beyond dedicated tankers, with prototypes targeting fuel flows compatible with tactical aircraft needs.[40]Buddy Pod and Versatile Systems
The buddy pod, also known as a buddy refueling store or tank, is an external pod mounted on fighter or attack aircraft that enables them to function as auxiliary tankers in a probe-and-drogue refueling configuration.[41] It typically integrates an auxiliary fuel tank with a hose-and-drogue dispensing system, allowing the host aircraft to transfer fuel to probe-equipped receivers while maintaining its combat role.[42] Developed primarily for naval carrier operations where dedicated tankers are limited, buddy pods provide rapid deployment of refueling capability from fast-jet platforms, extending the endurance of strike packages without diverting large tanker assets.[43] Early operational use dates to the Korean War, where U.S. Air Force RF-80A reconnaissance fighters received fuel from KB-29 tankers via rudimentary buddy setups on July 6, 1951, marking the first combat refueling of jet fighters.[14] Technical specifications vary by model and manufacturer, but common designs like the Douglas D-704 or later Eaton variants carry 300-450 U.S. gallons (1,135-1,703 liters) of transferable fuel and deploy a hose at rates up to 300-500 gallons per minute, with drogue stabilization for high-speed connections.[42][41] The pod mounts on standard hardpoints, such as underwing or centerline stations, and includes pumps, valves, and controls integrated with the host aircraft's fuel system, often requiring minimal modifications.[44] In U.S. Navy service, F/A-18 Hornets and Super Hornets routinely employ buddy pods for peer-to-peer refueling, as demonstrated in joint exercises where an F/A-18E refueled a French Rafale using a centerline pod in March 2015.[43] This system enhances tactical flexibility in contested environments by distributing refueling assets among surviving fighters, reducing reliance on vulnerable dedicated tankers.[45] Versatile systems extend buddy pod concepts through modular, hybrid designs that support both probe-and-drogue and boom interfaces or adapt to diverse platforms, including unmanned aircraft. The U.S. Air Force's Small Hybrid Aerial Refueling Kit (SHARK), initiated under AFWerX contracts awarded in August 2024, develops podded systems for F-15 Eagles and drones, incorporating boom extensions for receptacle-equipped receivers alongside traditional drogue options.[46][47] SHARK's platform-agnostic design fits within 1,000-2,000 pound payloads, enabling fuel offload from forward-deployed fighters to extend reach in Pacific theater scenarios where large tankers risk attrition.[48] Eaton's SHARK variant, contracted in 2024, emphasizes interoperability across manned and unmanned systems, with testing focused on transfer rates compatible with tactical jets (200-400 gallons per minute) and automated hose management to reduce pilot workload.[49] These advancements address compatibility gaps in legacy fleets, where buddy pods traditionally favored drogue-only operations, by incorporating adapters for hybrid refueling in multi-domain operations.[50] Such versatility mitigates single-point failures in tanker fleets, as evidenced by simulations showing 20-30% range extensions for drone swarms via podded relay tanking.[38]Operational Applications
Combat Deployments in Major Conflicts
Aerial refueling saw its first combat application during the Korean War on July 6, 1951, when three RF-80A Shooting Stars were refueled mid-air by KB-29 Superfortress tankers over Korea, enabling reconnaissance missions from bases in Japan without landing in theater.[51] [52] This marked the initial operational use of the looped-hose system on fighters in wartime, extending range and loiter time over North Korean targets amid logistical constraints of forward basing.[53] KB-29s continued supporting F-84 Thunderjets and other fighters, refueling them en route from Japan, which conserved airfield capacity and reduced exposure to ground threats.[54] In the Vietnam War, KC-135 Stratotankers became pivotal for sustaining long-range strikes into North Vietnam, refueling B-52 Stratofortresses, F-105 Thunderchiefs, and F-4 Phantoms from anchors over Laos, Thailand, and the South China Sea to overcome distance limitations from regional bases.[55] Tankers offloaded fuel to tactical aircraft transiting from the United States, enabling deployment without intermediate stops and supporting sustained bombing campaigns like Operation Rolling Thunder from 1965 onward.[56] By war's end, aerial refueling had facilitated over 800,000 individual receiver contacts, with KC-135s operating from bases like Andersen on Guam and U-Tapao in Thailand to extend combat endurance against defended airspace.[57] During Operation Desert Storm in 1991, aerial refueling underpinned the coalition's air superiority campaign, with U.S. tankers—primarily KC-135s and KC-10s—flying 4,967 sorties and accumulating 19,700 hours during Desert Shield buildup, offloading 54 million pounds of fuel to enable F-15s, F-16s, and bombers to strike Iraqi targets from distant bases.[58] This effort, the largest in history at the time, allowed strike packages to ingress at high speeds without loiter penalties, contributing to the destruction of Iraq's integrated air defenses in the opening phases starting January 17, 1991.[59] Allied tankers, including RAF VC-10s, supported multinational receivers, refueling over 50,000 times to sustain 100,000 sorties across the 42-day campaign.[60] In the 2003 Iraq War, tankers comprised about 15% of coalition sorties, enabling rapid strikes during the "Shock and Awe" phase beginning March 20, with KC-135s and KC-10s establishing multiple air refueling tracks along the Iraq-Saudi border to fuel F-16s, F/A-18s, and B-1s for high-tempo operations from bases in Kuwait and Qatar.[61] [62] This refueling architecture supported precision attacks on regime targets, allowing receivers to maximize payload and sortie generation without basing constraints.[63] Similarly, in Afghanistan from 2001 onward, KC-135s and KC-10s conducted thousands of combat refuelings over hostile terrain, with crews logging over 100 sorties per airman in some units to sustain close air support for ground forces via extended orbits of A-10s, F-15s, and F-16s.[64] [65]Non-Combat and Endurance Records
Aerial refueling has facilitated several landmark non-combat endurance flights, primarily by U.S. Air Force strategic bombers to demonstrate global reach and operational sustainability. The pioneering achievement occurred with the Boeing B-50A Superfortress Lucky Lady II, which completed the first non-stop circumnavigation of the Earth from February 26 to March 2, 1949. Departing from Carswell Air Force Base, Texas, under the command of Capt. James G. Gallagher with a crew of 14, the aircraft covered 23,452 miles in 94 hours and 1 minute, sustained by four aerial refuelings from KB-29M tankers positioned along the route.[19][17] Subsequent records advanced with jet aircraft during Operation Power Flite in January 1957, when three Boeing B-52B Stratofortresses, including Lucky Lady III commanded by Lt. Col. James H. Morris, executed the first non-stop jet-powered global circumnavigation. The formation flew 24,325 statute miles in 45 hours and 19 minutes, relying on multiple in-flight refuelings from KC-97 Stratofreighters to halve the time required compared to the piston-engine Lucky Lady II.[66] This mission underscored the transition to jet propulsion and enhanced refueling efficiency for sustained long-range operations.[67] In rotary-wing applications, aerial refueling enabled the U.S. Air Force to set a helicopter distance record in May 1967, when two Sikorsky HH-3E Jolly Green Giants flew non-stop from New York to Paris, covering approximately 3,585 miles in 18 hours and 10 minutes with five refuelings each from KC-97 and KC-135 tankers.[68] Post-Cold War demonstrations included Global Power 94-7 on August 1–2, 1994, where two B-52H Stratofortresses from Barksdale Air Force Base completed a 47-hour non-stop circumnavigation, incorporating aerial refuelings to validate persistent global strike capabilities amid force reductions.[69] These efforts highlight aerial refueling's role in extending aircraft endurance beyond fuel constraints, limited primarily by crew fatigue and mechanical reliability.Helicopter and Rotary-Wing Integration
Aerial refueling for helicopters and rotary-wing aircraft predominantly utilizes the probe-and-drogue system, enabling fuel transfer at speeds typically between 100 and 120 knots, which aligns with the operational envelopes of these platforms.[70] This method involves a rigid probe on the receiver aircraft inserting into a drogue at the end of a flexible hose trailed from the tanker, offering greater forgiveness for relative motion compared to rigid boom systems.[71] Development of helicopter aerial refueling began in the early 1960s to extend the range of combat search and rescue (CSAR) operations during the Vietnam War, with the first successful probe-drogue contact achieved by a U.S. Air Force CH-3C helicopter on December 17, 1965.[72] The initial operational test of dedicated helicopter refueling assets, the HH-3E Jolly Green Giant and HC-130P tanker, occurred on June 21, 1967, in Southeast Asia, marking the combat debut of the capability for extending rotary-wing endurance beyond ground refueling limitations.[71] Subsequent refinements allowed for day and night operations, transitioning from rescue-focused missions to broader special operations forces (SOF) applications, including deep insertions and extractions.[70] By 1989, overt use in Operation Just Cause demonstrated MH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters refueling from MC-130 tankers, enhancing tactical flexibility in Panama.[70] U.S. military rotary-wing platforms equipped for aerial refueling include the Air Force's HH-60G/W Pave Hawk and HH-53/MH-53 Pave Low, the Army's MH-47 Chinook variants, and the Marine Corps' CH-53E/K Super Stallion and King Stallion.[73] [74] Tankers such as the KC-130J, MC-130J/H, and HC-130 support these operations, with the probe-drogue configuration allowing multiple receivers in some setups.[70] The capability has been employed in conflicts like Operations Desert Storm and Enduring Freedom, where it facilitated CSAR, infiltration, and sustained loiter times despite tanker shortages occasionally constraining mission pacing.[70] Integration challenges stem from rotor downwash disrupting drogue stability and the need for precise formation flying at low altitudes, demanding extensive pilot training—often semi-annual proficiency contacts—to mitigate risks of probe strikes or hose entanglement.[70] Recent advancements, such as the HH-60W Combat Rescue Helicopter's successful refueling tests in 2020 and the CH-53K's air-to-air demonstrations in the same year, underscore ongoing efforts to incorporate automation and improved probe designs for enhanced safety and efficiency.[73] These developments extend operational reach for modern SOF and CSAR missions, with tiltrotor platforms like the V-22 Osprey also leveraging similar systems for hybrid fixed- and rotary-wing refueling.[70]Strategic Advantages and Challenges
Enhancements to Military Reach and Flexibility
Aerial refueling extends the operational reach of military aircraft by enabling in-flight fuel transfer, allowing receiver platforms to exceed their unrefueled combat radius and conduct missions from secure, rearward bases rather than relying on contested forward airfields.[75] This capability directly amplifies power projection, as combat aircraft can launch with full payloads, engage targets at extended distances, and return after post-strike refueling, thereby increasing overall mission effectiveness without compromising armament loads.[75] For instance, refueling supports transoceanic deployments and sustained presence in remote theaters, reducing logistical vulnerabilities associated with host-nation basing agreements.[76] The flexibility afforded by aerial refueling manifests in enhanced operational tempo, permitting aircraft to loiter over battle areas for prolonged periods, dynamically retask mid-mission, or integrate into time-sensitive strikes without returning to base for fuel.[77] Tankers act as force multipliers by servicing diverse receiver types—fighters, bombers, transports, and reconnaissance platforms—enabling synchronized, multi-axis operations that adapt to evolving threats.[75] This versatility supports economy of force principles, where fewer assets achieve greater effects through extended endurance, and facilitates rapid global mobility for crisis response without prepositioned infrastructure.[78] In Operation Desert Storm (1991), aerial refueling underpinned the coalition air campaign by enabling U.S. and allied fighters to strike deep into Iraqi territory from bases in Saudi Arabia, with tankers conducting the largest refueling operation in history—over 16,000 sorties and delivery of approximately 58 million gallons of fuel—to sustain more than 50,000 combat sorties.[58] This extension of reach allowed precision attacks on strategic targets while minimizing exposure to ground-based defenses, demonstrating how refueling transforms limited-range tactical aircraft into instruments of theater-wide dominance.[35] Similar advantages persist in contemporary great-power scenarios, where tanker fleets enable persistent surveillance and strike capabilities across vast distances, countering anti-access/area-denial environments.[76]Technical Risks, Safety Concerns, and Vulnerabilities
Aerial refueling entails significant technical risks primarily stemming from mechanical failures in transfer systems, such as boom telescoping malfunctions or probe-drogue disconnect issues, which can lead to structural damage or aborted missions. In the boom method, rigid extension and retraction mechanisms are susceptible to binding or misalignment under dynamic flight conditions, as evidenced by multiple incidents involving the U.S. Air Force's KC-46A Pegasus tanker. Between 2024 and 2025, three separate mishaps occurred where the KC-46's refueling boom nozzle bound during disconnection from receiver aircraft, resulting in the boom striking and damaging the receivers' fuel receptacles; these events caused approximately $22.8 million in combined damage to the tankers and fighters involved, including F-22 Raptors. Investigations attributed the failures to inadequate lubrication, thermal expansion, and design tolerances in the boom's telescoping segments, prompting interim fixes like enhanced training and procedural adjustments pending hardware modifications.[79][80] Safety concerns are amplified by the precision required for contact, where even minor positional errors can precipitate collisions; historical analyses of KC-135 Stratotanker operations identified pilot overcontrol and boom operator misjudgments as leading causes in approximately 40% of refueling-related mishaps from the 1970s to 1980s, often exacerbated by turbulence or formation instability. Human factors, including fatigue and communication lapses between crews, further heighten risks, as tanker-receiver positioning demands continuous visual and radio coordination at relative speeds of 200-300 knots. Weather-induced turbulence poses additional hazards, potentially causing unintended separation or fuel spills, while fuel system leaks during transfer introduce fire risks from ignition sources like static discharge, though empirical data indicate such events remain rare due to inerting systems and rigorous pre-flight checks. Overall, U.S. Air Force refueling mishap rates have trended low, aligning with broader Class A flight incident rates of 1.7-1.8 per 100,000 flying hours in stabilized periods, but each occurrence underscores the operation's unforgiving nature.[81] Vulnerabilities in aerial refueling manifest acutely in contested environments, where tankers' large radar cross-sections, subsonic speeds, and predictable loiter patterns render them high-value, soft targets for surface-to-air missiles or fighter intercepts, necessitating defensive escorts or standoff distances that reduce operational efficiency. In anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) scenarios, such as potential conflicts involving advanced integrated air defenses, the U.S. tanker fleet's aging composition—predominantly KC-135s averaging over 60 years old—exacerbates brittleness, with limited surge capacity risking mission sustainment after early losses; simulations and doctrinal assessments highlight that attrition of just 20-30% of tankers could halve combat air sorties. Technical dependencies, like unencrypted data links for boom guidance or probe alignment, introduce cyber or electronic warfare susceptibilities, potentially disrupting transfers mid-mission, while fuel load vulnerabilities amplify blast radii from hits, as seen in theoretical models of jet fuel detonation cascades. Mitigation strategies emphasize dispersal basing and allied interoperability, yet persistent platform limitations underscore refueling's role as a force multiplier inverted into a chokepoint during peer-level warfare.[82][83][84]Compatibility Constraints and Standardization Efforts
Aerial refueling operations face significant compatibility constraints due to the prevalence of two distinct refueling methods: the rigid flying boom system, primarily employed by the United States Air Force for high-volume transfers to receptacle-equipped receivers, and the flexible probe-and-drogue system, favored by the U.S. Navy, most NATO allies, and other international operators for its adaptability to multiple simultaneous connections.[85] These systems are inherently incompatible without modifications, as boom-equipped tankers cannot directly interface with probe-equipped receivers, and vice versa, limiting interoperability in multinational coalitions where mixed fleets are common.[86] For instance, U.S. Air Force fighters and bombers with boom receptacles require specialized drogue adapters on tankers or alternative tanker assets to refuel from probe-drogue platforms, which introduces logistical complexities and delays in dynamic combat environments.[87] The flying boom method enables faster fuel transfer rates—up to 6,000 pounds per minute for large aircraft like bombers—due to its rigid, telescoping structure and direct connection, but it demands precise positioning by a dedicated boom operator and is less suited for smaller or agile receivers.[31] In contrast, probe-and-drogue systems, which deploy a trailing hose with a funnel-like drogue, support lower flow rates (typically 3,000 pounds per minute or less) but allow a single tanker to service up to three aircraft concurrently via multiple drogues or buddy pods, enhancing flexibility for carrier-based or fighter operations.[31] Compatibility issues extend beyond mechanical interfaces to include variances in fuel pressure (e.g., 35-55 psi for NATO-standard probe-drogue), receptacle dimensions, and electrical signaling for connection confirmation, which can lead to clearance certification delays or outright mission aborts if not pre-validated.[87] These disparities have historically constrained U.S. cross-service and allied operations, as evidenced by 1990s initiatives to assess shifting the Air Force to probe-and-drogue for commonality, though such efforts were ultimately rejected due to the boom's efficiency advantages for strategic bombers.[85] To mitigate these constraints, NATO has pursued standardization through Standardization Agreements (STANAGs), which define interoperable interfaces for both systems without mandating convergence. STANAG 3447, ratified in 2016, establishes specifications for probe-and-drogue compatibility, including drogue diameter (approximately 13 inches), probe rigidity, and fuel delivery pressures to ensure reliable connections across allied aircraft.[88] Similarly, STANAG 7191 outlines broader air-to-air refueling equipment requirements, such as interface geometries and performance criteria, ratified as of 2018 to facilitate technical clearances and reduce validation efforts for multinational exercises.[89] Allied Tactical Publications (ATPs) like ATP-3.3.4.6 further detail procedural and equipment standards, promoting dual-system ratification where probe-drogue serves as the baseline for most NATO members, while accommodating U.S. boom operations via documented reservations.[90] Practical standardization has advanced through hybrid configurations and adapters, enabling greater flexibility. Boom-drogue adapter pods, fitted to tankers like the KC-135 or KC-46, allow rigid-boom platforms to extend a drogue for probe receivers, as demonstrated in U.S. operations supporting allied forces since the 2000s.[87] Modern tankers such as the Boeing KC-46 Pegasus incorporate both boom and drogue capabilities natively, with wing-mounted pods for the latter, addressing compatibility gaps and entering U.S. service in 2019 to enhance joint and coalition efficacy.[86] The Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) coordinates ongoing efforts, including similarity criteria for tanker-receiver pairs to streamline compatibility assessments, though full global standardization remains elusive due to non-NATO operators like Russia and China employing proprietary probe variants incompatible with Western standards.[91] These measures have incrementally improved interoperability, but persistent dual-system reliance underscores trade-offs between specialized efficiency and universal access.[86]Recent and Future Advancements
Modern Tanker Platforms and Automation
The Boeing KC-46A Pegasus, operational with the United States Air Force since 2019, represents a key modern tanker platform derived from the 767 commercial airliner, equipped with a fly-by-wire refueling boom capable of offloading fuel at rates up to 1,200 gallons per minute to large receiver aircraft.[92] Its advanced digital avionics and remote vision system enhance boom operator situational awareness, addressing limitations in older KC-135 models by providing 3D imagery and reducing turbulence-induced disconnects.[92] The platform supports both boom and drogue refueling, with a total fuel capacity of approximately 191,000 pounds transferable, enabling extended range for fighters, bombers, and transports in contested environments.[93] The Airbus A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT), in service with over a dozen nations since 2011, offers dual boom and hose-and-drogue systems integrated into a wide-body airframe based on the A330, with a fuel offload capacity exceeding 245,000 pounds and compatibility with more than 100 receiver types.[94] Its fly-by-wire controls and automated fuel management systems prioritize efficiency, allowing simultaneous refueling of multiple aircraft while maintaining strategic airlift roles.[94] Operators such as Australia (KC-30 variant) and NATO allies leverage its interoperability, which has logged millions of pounds of fuel transferred in multinational operations.[94] Automation advancements in these platforms focus on reducing human error and pilot workload during dynamic coupling phases. The A330 MRTT achieved certification for automatic air-to-air refueling (A3R) boom operations in daylight with F-16 receivers in July 2022, marking the first such approval for a tanker aircraft, followed by extensions to A330 MRTT self-refueling and F-15 compatibility in 2023.[95] Night-time A3R trials succeeded in July 2024, using infrared vision systems to enable hands-off boom extension, contact, and fuel transfer under low-visibility conditions, thereby enhancing operational tempo in high-threat scenarios.[96] Boeing's KC-46A incorporates semi-automated features like boom disconnect automation and predictive positioning algorithms, with ongoing development toward full autonomy through Air Force Research Laboratory contracts awarded in April 2025, aiming for teaming with unmanned systems.[97] These efforts, including sensor fusion and AI-driven stability controls, address challenges in turbulent formations and enable reduced-crew or remote operations, as emphasized in analyses for Indo-Pacific theaters where sustained presence demands minimized human intervention.[98] Such automation improves safety by lowering disconnect risks—historically a factor in mid-air collisions—and supports proliferation to smaller platforms like pod-equipped fighters for distributed refueling networks.[99]Unmanned and Next-Generation Systems
The development of unmanned aerial refueling systems aims to reduce risks to human crews, extend operational endurance, and enable integration with autonomous combat aircraft fleets. The U.S. Navy's MQ-25 Stingray, developed by Boeing, represents a primary example, designed as the first carrier-based unmanned tanker to refuel fighter jets like the F/A-18 Super Hornet and extend the range of carrier air wings. Ground testing of production-representative MQ-25 aircraft began in July 2025, with initial operational deployment planned for 2026 from aircraft carriers. The system carries up to 15,000 pounds of fuel and supports probe-and-drogue refueling, building on prior demonstrations such as the Northrop Grumman X-47B's autonomous refueling of an unmanned aircraft in April 2015.[100][101][102][103] Advancements in autonomous refueling technologies complement unmanned platforms by automating engagement processes, addressing precision challenges in turbulent conditions. The U.S. Air Force tested semi-autonomous systems on KC-135 Stratotankers in May 2024, integrating algorithms to reduce pilot workload during boom operations and enhance efficiency for future uncrewed tankers. Similarly, the Air Force Research Laboratory solicited proposals in August 2025 for automated boom systems enabling uncrewed aircraft to refuel manned receivers, focusing on machine vision and control algorithms for docking accuracy within inches. Probe-and-drogue automation has progressed through stabilized drogues, as demonstrated by Eaton's actively controlled systems tested in 2024, which mitigate oscillations to support higher-speed engagements up to 350 knots.[104][105][99] Next-generation efforts emphasize hybrid manned-unmanned operations and podded refueling solutions for non-traditional platforms. The U.S. Air Force is exploring boom pods adaptable to fighters like the F-15 or drones, allowing distributed refueling in contested environments such as the Pacific theater, with concepts advanced by September 2024. International programs, including Airbus's A330 MRTT upgrades announced in September 2024, incorporate full-process automation for guiding receivers into position without operator intervention, tested in probe-and-drogue configurations. These systems prioritize reliability through redundant sensors and AI-driven fault tolerance, though challenges persist in electromagnetic interference resistance and certification for combat use, as evidenced by ongoing simulations and flight trials. Market analyses project the unmanned air-to-air refueling sector to exceed $1.4 billion by 2024, driven by demand for scalable, low-cost tanking in peer conflicts.[47][106][107]Global Operators and Proliferation Trends
The United States operates the world's largest and most capable aerial refueling fleet, with 605 tanker aircraft as of 2025, representing approximately 75% of the global total.[108][109] This dominance stems from extensive investments in dedicated platforms like the KC-135 Stratotanker (375 active), KC-46 Pegasus (88), and variants such as the KC-130J (74 for the U.S. Marine Corps), enabling unmatched global power projection and support for allied operations.[109] Other major operators maintain smaller fleets, often comprising converted transports or aging dedicated tankers, with varying degrees of operational readiness; for instance, Russia's 19 Il-78M Midas tankers include only 10-12 airworthy units due to maintenance challenges.[108][109]| Rank | Country | Tanker Fleet Size (2025) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States | 605 |
| 2 | Saudi Arabia | 22 |
| 3 | Russia | 19 |
| 4 | France | 16 |
| 5 | Israel | 14 |
| 6 | Singapore | 11 |
| 7 | China | 10 |
| 8 | Japan | 10 |
| 9 | United Kingdom | 9 |
| 10 | Italy | 8 |
