Latest Breaking News

DetroitLegalBeagle

(2,500 posts)

60. Their mission scope generally doesnt have them exposed to enemy aircraft

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 12:46 AM

Sunday

They stick to controlled airspace further back from the front. Their exposure to missiles is supposed to be minimal, so escape methods beyond parachutes aren't considered important enough. The fuel they can carry to refuel the fighters and bombers is deemed a more important use of weight and space. Mission scope sets the priorities and ejection systems are not one for tankers and cargo aircraft because of the environment they are designed to operate in. Is it a risk? Definitely, but its been deemed an acceptable risk.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

KC-135 tanker involved in Epic Fury goes down in Iraq: CENTCOM [View all] vanessa_ca Mar 12 OP

based on the 707. these ancient craft must be heck to maintain nt msongs Mar 12 #1

I know, my Dad was flying them in Viet Nam. Irish_Dem Mar 12 #3

They fly out of Seymour Johnston AFB DenaliDemocrat Friday #51

I think it is a Boeing 707 frame. Irish_Dem Friday #54

I was an AWACS crewmember Puppyjive Mar 12 #18

Actually it's based on a dash 80. The KC-135 was about a year ahead of the 707. Angleae Friday #44

But no consideration for crew viability? OAITW r.2.0 Friday #45

None RoseTrellis Friday #49

Thank you! KT2000 Friday #52

Oh no.... Irish_Dem Mar 12 #2

Not good. A second KC 135 "landed safely in Israel" vanessa_ca Mar 12 #6

Crew of six. Irish_Dem Mar 12 #14

There are lots of Iranian drones moving thru that Captain Zero Friday #56

When will they realize that it's more humiliating to claim combat losses are accidents vanessa_ca Friday #58

In flight refueling has inherent risks. OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #4

It's weird that both affected planes were refuelers Prairie Gates Mar 12 #9

That is odd... 2naSalit Mar 12 #12

I saw two of the Pegasus tankers very close tonekat Mar 12 #24

That's what I saw... 2naSalit Mar 12 #25

I didn't know that it involved 2 KC-135 tankers. That's really crazy. I have to believe each tanker has at least OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #13

CENTCOM's only saying two aircraft Prairie Gates Mar 12 #20

I would think mid-air refueling tankers are closely watched to avoid this very situation. OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #21

Pic downthread would seem to confirm that both the crashed aircraft and the safely landed one Prairie Gates Mar 12 #32

Why would that happen? OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #35

Unlikely... 2naSalit Mar 12 #11

I didn't know all the facts when I posted. OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #16

It's a reasonable one but... 2naSalit Mar 12 #22

True story....worked at a gas bottling plant in Portland, Maine for 8 months, We bottled from bulk,. OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #37

Not avgas RoseTrellis Friday #47

That was after my time... 2naSalit Friday #55

I remember when one blew up over Illinois in 1982 Hassin Bin Sober Mar 12 #33

Just got a Guardian breaking news banner BumRushDaShow Mar 12 #5

I'm going to call this one: add three to the KIA tally Prairie Gates Mar 12 #7

I hope not, but I fear you're right -eom vanessa_ca Mar 12 #10

Anything approved for news by this administration is suspect CentralMass Mar 12 #8

No ejection seats on this aircraft. mn9driver Mar 12 #15

Given the danger of this flight requirement....seems like ejection seats for the pilots and the OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #17

Might be a side door... 2naSalit Mar 12 #23

Pretty doubtful. Once they are locked into their seat, given their situation...not a lot of time to figure a quick exit OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #26

Hmm... 2naSalit Mar 12 #27

Let's say you lose a wing or tail at 35,000 ft, flying at 450mph.. OAITW r.2.0 Mar 12 #29

They don't even have parachutes anymore vanessa_ca Mar 12 #36

So, help me understand. Fighter pilots need ejection support,,,,but tanker pilots don't? OAITW r.2.0 Friday #38

That's my logical understanding, but I can't add anything vanessa_ca Friday #39

While I am a pilot.... OAITW r.2.0 Friday #41

Compared to 0 hours in no seat of any Cessna (me) lol vanessa_ca Friday #43

Not just tankers. RoseTrellis Friday #48

mission scope is different, and structure wise its very different DetroitLegalBeagle Friday #53

Don'tcha think Pilots in tanker have exposure? OAITW r.2.0 Saturday #59

Their mission scope generally doesnt have them exposed to enemy aircraft DetroitLegalBeagle Sunday #60

Seems like missile technology has evolved over the years. OAITW r.2.0 Tuesday #61

The Epstein Administration will be claiming the media is trying to make it look bad. Marcuse Mar 12 #19

Fatigue Maninacan Mar 12 #28

Pic of KC-135 after landing in Tel Aviv with nearly half of its vertical stabilizer torn away vanessa_ca Mar 12 #30

Mid-air collision between two KC-135s is the claim from CENTCOM, then Prairie Gates Mar 12 #31

I know vanessa_ca Mar 12 #34

Tankers do not collide on mission. They are totally controlled by AWACs on theater, OAITW r.2.0 Friday #42

The Stratotanker, however, does not have ejection seats. CENTCOM said "rescue efforts are ongoing." riversedge Friday #40

The pilots, the crew, and the planes would all be fine if not for Trump's unneeded war Botany Friday #46

Operation Epic Fuckup. milestogo Friday #50

The plane was based at Joint Base Andrews. mahatmakanejeeves Friday #57