First pics of the RAF's first RC-135W Rivet Joint

[Andy K]

Absolutely untrue. The aircraft are being sold to the RAF, tax, tag, title, and license included. Crewed by the RAF, flown by 51 Squadron, and under UK tasking.

As stated in post 13 I stand corrected and I was joking about buying KC-135's. Humour clearly does'nt translate well, even with the use of smiley faces.

[Andy K]

KC-135 tankers wouldn't do you any good - these a/c don't have an ARR system fitted. It'll be interesting to see if they become the only members of the C-135 family to be fitted with refueling probes like the RAF's E-3s.

Hence my remark about buying KC-135's;

Edited December 27, 2012 by Andy K

[falcon]

KC-135 tankers wouldn't do you any good - these a/c don't have an ARR system fitted. It'll be interesting to see if they become the only members of the C-135 family to be fitted with refueling probes like the RAF's E-3s.

The RAF and French E-3's actually have both types of refuelling system.

[Irish 251]

The RAF's RC-135s are being converted from tankers, so they would have to be specially painted into whatever scheme they are going to have. What is shown in the photo is the standard USAF paint scheme for their RC-135s so, if authentic, this has been freshly applied to a former tanker. USAF RC-135W 62-4125 seems to already be in a configuration very close to that shown in the photo. http://tinyurl.com/d6hafmg

Edited December 27, 2012 by Irish 251

[Richard E]

I also believe it's for real because the antenna configuration, while very similar, is not identical to current USAF RJ's. The hump just ahead of the vertical fin is new, as is the wart on top of the cheek radome. Either way, pretty cool!

It also looks like there's a new bronze coloured appendage above the cheek radome on the demarcation line between the grey and white colours?

[Jennings Heilig]

Hence my remark about buying KC-135's

That's a USAF RC-135, all of which have the AAR system. KC-135 tankers don't have it, save for a few that had it installed for other purposes (eg: the former RC-135Ds). I'm betting the RAF isn't springing for the considerable expense of installing a system they don't use.

[dambuster]

Judging by the overspray on the floor and the tons of masking paper that looks like a fresh paint job. Maybe that will be the final scheme plus roundels of course.

Peter

[upnorth]

No reason to disbelieve that picture, it certainly looks legitimate enough. Though I do suspect, as others have, that it's just a temporary "working" scheme.

If it was permanent, why would the RAF not have provided their standard titling for the american paint shop to put on it. The "Royal Air Force" on this plane is in USAF standard titling, likely because it was what was on hand and why would you go to too much trouble making it all look really good if you knew it was only temporary?

[bentwaters81tfw]

No RAF fin flash either, so why bother with the RAF titles...??

Military aircraft are requrted by international law to have insignia in 6 places. They will appear.

Edited December 28, 2012 by bentwaters81tfw

[Harry Lime]

IIRC, the original Nimrod R.1's were XW664, 665 and 666 - I dare say those serial numbers selected for the Rivet Joint aircraft were deliberately chosen for that reason.

Wez

And didn't Nimrod R1 XW666 come down in the Moray Firth following an engine fire? A text book ditching with all crew surviving if I'm thinking of the right incident? Doesn't bode well for ZZ666.....

Mark.

[Col.]

Anyone know just how old or how many flying hours these airframes have accumulated prior to conversion?

Also, if they have been converted from tankers, was that really a more cost effective option that a newer airframe refitted for purpose?

[Hawkkeeper]

around 20 to 23.000 for each of the 3 airframes, it's in one of the earlier links,

UK national insignia is a mandatory marking so they will have to be applied.

[SkippyBing]

Also, if they have been converted from tankers, was that really a more cost effective option that a newer airframe refitted for purpose?

The problem with refitting a newer airframe is that you'd have to do all the hard (read expensive) work of planning the conversion, determining where to site the various antenna for optimum propagation/field of view/minimum interference etc. With the -135 airframe all that's known and you're not ending up with three bespoke aircraft that will require a separate design team every time you want to add/remove anything.

Obviously you'll face the same problems every time you want to add something the USAF haven't, so I give it about 12 months...

[pte1643]

Obviously you'll face the same problems every time you want to add something

Bit like the AEW Nimrod. Another reason to go with a "proven" system.

[Col.]

Thanks for the information gents. I've been too lazy to follow all the provided links so instead asked secure in the knowledge others with more understanding of this would keep me right

[Geoff_B]

Well the RAF markings and serial will be 1/1 scale decals i suspect the Royal Air Force title was painted on as part of the paint scheme. As others have pointed out you can clearly see the masking paper cluttered around the floor so this photo is obviously after the paint shop have just finished and are checking their work before they get started on the markings and stencils.

We're just going to have to wait on them finishing the aircraft and see what it looks like when its rolled out !

[Simon]

Looks like they've come up with a rather extreme weight-saving measure to compensate for all the gubbins they've stuck on the outside of the airframe - it's only got one port engine...

I think the climb-rate may suffer though

[Jennings Heilig]

Military aircraft are requited by international law to have insignia in 6 places. They will appear.

No, officially they're required to have some form of national ID, but even that is pretty much ignored. Nothing says where or how many insignias they have to have. Many US military a/c have no national insignias at all (Army helos since the end of Vietnam). Lots of military a/c flying around with nothing but a tiny serial number, if even that.

[SkippyBing]

No, officially they're required to have some form of national ID, but even that is pretty much ignored.

As I understand it, not having the national ID removes the various rights and obligations state aircraft have. So on one hand it's handy if you want to conduct flights through someone else's airspace that you shouldn't be, on the other you can't call it an act of war if you get shot down.

[Slater]

I would imagine that painting an aircraft such as this would be quite expensive. I'm not sure why they would go through the expense of repainting it later in standard RAF tones (if that's indeed the intention).

[Jennings Heilig]

I would imagine that painting an aircraft such as this would be quite expensive. I'm not sure why they would go through the expense of repainting it later in standard RAF tones (if that's indeed the intention).

Precisely. You don't completely repaint and airplane just to turn around and repaint it again months later for giggles.

Re the national markings - there is certainly no requirement to have six national markings, since the US has never done that in its history. At most we've had four, as have many other countries. Poland, the USSR before the mid-1950s, and North Korea have never used upper wing insignias.

[dambuster]

Bit like the AEW Nimrod. Another reason to go with a "proven" system.

Only if the proven system meets your military needs. Of course, we don't know what the UK intel community needs are and I think it would be naive to believe that our needs were the same as those of the Americans.

Peter

[Max Headroom]

Can anyone tell me why they have serials in the ZZ*** range?

Trevor

[Slater]

According to the news release, the purchase includes the following:

"Three APX-119 Identification Friend or Foe Systems, three LN-100GT Inertial Reference Units, five Joint Tactical Information Distribution System terminals, 18 ARC-210 Radios, and 28 ARC-210 Radio control heads, modification kits, integration and installation, Ground Distributed Processing Station, Modular Processing System, Airborne Capability Extension System, mission trainer, tools and test equipment, spare and repair parts, publications, personnel training and training equipment, support equipment, U.S. government and contractor representative technical and logistics personnel services, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $1.068 billion."

Does anyone know what the "Airborne Capability Extension System" is? Maybe some sort of aerial refueling system?

[Rob P]

Can anyone tell me why they have serials in the ZZ*** range?

Trevor

Aren't the "ZZ's" the leased aircraft? (PFI) I know the C-17's are in that range, even though we subsequently bought them, as are the King Airs and the A330 Voyagers.