Strategic Air to air Refueling

[Eye In The Sky]

Strategic AAR is really for the Jets - whether it be fighters, bombers, strategic trash-haulers (C-17). 

What you are describing is the role of the Tactical AAR - a helicopter can't fly fast enough to refuel effectively off a jet airliner, conversely that same airliners might experience some difficulties slowing down enough.  The C-130 usually refuels the helo-assets in the US military.  AFAIK, we are not considering this role for our legacy Hercs.

Oops.  I should have spelled it out more rather than saying "extended" to include what you had said re: Herc's/Tac AAR.  My bad.  But you got what I meant, and thanks for the answer. 

 

[FoverF]

Strategic AAR is really for the Jets - whether it be fighters, bombers, strategic trash-haulers (C-17). 

Can a C-17 actually be refueled via a drogue?

It can't so far as I know (but I have been wrong before), because I don't think it has a probe, and even if it did, it would burn gas pretty much as quickly as it could take it on from a drogue. A tanker could 'drag' a C-17, but not really properly refuel one.

 

[aesop081]

Can a C-17 actually be refueled via a drogue?

It cant and no one here said that it could either.

 

[bartbandyrfc]

Strategic AAR is really for the Jets - whether it be fighters, bombers, strategic trash-haulers (C-17). 

What you are describing is the role of the Tactical AAR - a helicopter can't fly fast enough to refuel effectively off a jet airliner, conversely that same airliners might experience some difficulties slowing down enough.  The C-130 usually refuels the helo-assets in the US military.  AFAIK, we are not considering this role for our legacy Hercs.

This is a bit philosophical, and I wager off topic - but it is a pet peeve of mine.  The Canadian Air Force has got to get out of the mind set that says "strategic" means "large" and "intercontinental" (i.e. long range).  This is old thinking.  We used to call our Boeing 707s strategic, because of the size and range of the asset.  We now are doing the same thing with C-17s and with the new tanker conversion. 

Our purchase of the tanker conversion was labeled "strategic" in that we could take our CF-18s and deploy them quickly to some place far away from home so that they could be used to achieve strategic effect.  However, the tanker kit can just as easily be used for tactical effects, for example as a tactical asset chopped to NORAD in support of Operation NOBLE EAGLE.  The same is true for the C-17.  We can use that asset for strategic effect (responding to a natural disaster in order to stabilise a region of the world), or tactically (hauling fuel to Alert).

Conversely, a medium range/medium lift USMC MC-130T tanker could support a small USAF pavehawk helicopter that is transporting a section sized US Army SOF team.  That Delta Force team might have a strategic mission, for example a hypothetical hostage rescue of five heads of state that were captured by some terrorists baddies. 

The range and speed of the asset is immaterial.  The use of the asset is material to whether it is either strategic, operational, or tactical.  This is one of the tenets of air power.

BB

 

[SupersonicMax]

On the Discovery channel show Airstream, a reality show forcused on the fighter pilot selection process based in Cold Lake, it would seem that this technology was already available to CF pilots. One guys nickname was Broketip, or something to that effect, because he turned off early, damaging the nozzle or something. What up with that?

His callsign was Bobbit