It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gilmore takes aim at KC-46

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Michael Gilmore, head of the IOT&E office (who is leaving soon, thank god) has taken aim at the KC-46 program now. His latest memo calls its schedule "aggressive and unlikely to be executed as planned". The program has encountered several delays, as a result of the boom problem that they encountered. Since the boom redesign the program has been doing well, but Gilmore says the current schedule is based on "historically unrealistic test aircraft fly and re-fly rates".

They have demonstrated refueling with an A-10, F-18, AV-8B, C-17, and F-16, with the boom and centerline and wing pods, as well as taking on fuel from another tanker. They have yet to certify a receiver, and are still working on night refueling, but the program is moving forward well now. They plan EMP testing in April of this year, and have begun building the first lot of LRIP aircraft.


If past performance is any indication of future schedules, the Boeing KC-46A Pegasus tanker programme won’t go as planned, according to the Pentagon’s top weapons tester.

Based on the tanker replacement programme’s history, its current schedule is “aggressive and unlikely to be executed as planned,” Michael Gilmore wrote in his annual report. In a prime example of schedule delay, the US Air Force had planned to complete 66% of testing by the end of the engineering, manufacturing and development phase. By the beginning of low-rate production last August though, Boeing had completed only 30% of EMD testing, the report states.

When Gilmore’s office approved a test and evaluation master plan in November 2016 that would support KC-46’s entrance into low-rate production that August, it did so with lingering concerns about leaving enough time to correct discrepancies between the end of developmental testing and the beginning of initial operational test and evaluation, he writes.

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So after OK'ing it while in office, is he a political appointee, now that he's leaving, he wants to kill it, or at the very least delay it?

Really? My first thought is why? Second thought, it, the timing, is shall we say, suspicious...



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

The last few years he's been hitting programs all over the place. Just about every major program that he's reported on in the last year, he's said has been in major trouble, and would fall on its face for one reason or another. He really hates the F-35 though.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Does he hate the F-35 because of whats stated, or does he prefer another aircraft ?

kind regards,

bally.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: bally001

It appears that he is against it for what the JPO and Pentagon are putting out. He has claimed several times that they didn't go through accurate IOC testing, and they shouldn't have been declared operational. He hasn't shown a preference for other aircraft.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Answers my question. Thank you,

bally



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join