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

[F-32]

I'm looking forward to seeing these come into service, I've always liked the RC family

[Blacktjet]

Not sure if this isn't just a USAF bird that has been in for a refit. However, is there a pale pink/blue fin flash just visible?

[NoVABill]

Here is the info on the Airseeker (RAF RC-135W):

All three airframes are converted from FY 1964 KC-135R airframes with F108 (CFM 56) engines, some of the last KC-135s built.  They do NOT have A/R receptacles fitted. A boom fitting is something that will have to be looked at/added later (as in the Nimrod R.1s when Operation Corporate kicked off). The last -135s built were all RC-135V and U models, with RC-135U (Combat Sent) 64-14849 as the last of the 800+ -135s.

 

Color scheme will be as shown in the L3 hangar photo.  Anything other than a 'white-top' does not keep the interior cool enough on the ground (different color scheme was discussed by L3 and the RAF).  RAF and USAF Rivet Joints will be painted the same.  Note the nice glossy finish on the radome:  L3 at Majors Field (Greenville, TX) has outstanding facilities and the paint is electro-deposited, resulting in a very good, rock-hard finish.  Not sure on what the markings will be as Jenings has muddied the waters with the PS versions.  Only the hangar photo is accurate.  I would bet on full color markings.

 

The Airseekers will be owned, flown and operated by the RAF.  The maintenance and upgrades will probably be done by L3 at Greenville, alongside the USAF aircraft.  No need to duplicate facilities in the UK.  Although there will be no UK jobs, there is very little UK-specific equipment on-board so there is no need for UK-specific maintenance at much higher cost.

 

Aircraft will be based at RAF Waddingtion, current home of 51 Sqn.  RAF Mildenhall is a USAF operated base - no agreement to base an RAF squadron there (and no room).

 

Nimrod R.1s were too small for the new equipment fits, including the HELIX design, and had severe airworthiness problems, as did all Nimrods.  My UK gov't contacts have said the MRA4s were a no go as no two airframes were alike and the upgrade was a custom form fit for each individual jet.  Prohibitively expensive and a nightmare to maintain into the future. 

It took quite a few years of upgrade cycles to get all the various RC-135 electrical systems layouts looking the same.  Sister jets always had a few circuit breakers in different positions in the cockpit.

 

Hope this settles some of the speculation from all the previous posts.

 

Bill

[sammy da fish]

Well done Bill for putting things straight again and getting the thread back on line. Again Well informed Bill.

[paul_c]

A mate of mine is a techie with the RAF Rivet Joint det in the States and he says that the a/c looks great in the flesh. He wasn't too forthcoming on the markings though!

 

I do like the idea of the white over light grey. It needs a thicker blue cheat line, D-Type roundels and proper Royal Air Force titles above the windows for the true retro look!

Edited January 20, 2013 by paul_c

[dambuster]

Here is the info on the Airseeker (RAF RC-135W):

All three airframes are converted from FY 1964 KC-135R airframes with F108 (CFM 56) engines, some of the last KC-135s built. 

 

Bill

Just for the record.

ZZ664 KC-135A-27-BN 64-14833 c/n 18773 first flight 29 Oct 64, re-engined 20 Sep 91 to KC-135R

ZZ665 KC-135A-27-BN 64-14838 c/n 18778 first flight 11 Dec 64, re-engined 10 Mar 93 to KC-135R

ZZ666 KC-135A-27-BN 64-14830 c/n 18770 first flight 12 Oct 64, re-engined 16 Apr 91 to KC-135R

Peter

[fmansam]

i cant wait to see one!

[PLC1966]

Taking todays prize for thread resurrection.

Ref the RC-135 Rivet Joint A/C colour scheme. Much as I thought the picture of the aircraft on the first page was a spoof. I have been on a course at Waddo the last couple of days's,and the latest prints for sale showing aircraft based there have a Rivet Joint RC-135 in this scheme. Obviously not proof but I would guess something has been pushed out about this scheme.

[Dave Fleming]

Just posted on PPRune:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/503657-raf-rivet-joint-9.html#post7842805

[Dave Fleming]

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.

Looks like they have!!

[canberraman]

The RAF Airseekers will be able to refuel from USAF KC-135s etc equipped with fixed booms, but they do bot have the probe and drogue capability that the RAF tankers provide.

Mark

[Dave Fleming]

The RAF Airseekers will be able to refuel from USAF KC-135s etc equipped with fixed booms, but they do bot have the probe and drogue capability that the RAF tankers provide.

Mark

J's point was the KC-135s that were converted did not have AAR receiving capacity - it has been added to them by the looks of those doors above the cockpit!

[bentwaters81tfw]

Perhaps that's where they will bolt the probe, like the Nimrod.

[Roland Pulfrew]

Just a thought; are we sure that is really one of "ours"? Looking at the reflections in he puddles the intake covers on the starboard wing show USAF covers. I know we are supposed to be keeping things common with the USAF but the lettering on the fuselage also looks a bit odd. As I say, just a thought.

[Max Headroom]

Maybe two covers is all they had so they put them on the same side.

Aesthetically I would have preferred the Royal Air Force titling on the upper front fuselage like the VC10 scheme of old.

Trevor

[Roland Pulfrew]

Max

Also no red (white) blue fin markings and no roundels on fuselage. Seems a bit odd to go to all that effort and then not add the legal nationality markings. And would they really only make 2 intake covers, when you know you are going to need 4??

[Max Headroom]

Roland!

Dunno really! It seems odd for L3 to roll this out half finished and for the RAF to allow them to in the first place. I can't see any Photoshoppery but them again I'm not an expert.

Trevor

[Roland Pulfrew]

And no announcement from the RAF that their latest (I hesitate to use he term "new") aircraft has rolled out.

[Geoff_B]

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a806fffeb-c4c1-4e03-a079-4df9983663b2

Thats the link to the bit on Aviation week where the photo is credited to the USAF via RAF Waddington

[PLC1966]

Allowing that the in-flight refuelling situation doesn't make sense to me, (are we only operating them where Uncle Sam can help support ops ... ), if there is no basis to these photo's, someone is going to some serious effort on a wind-up.

Edited May 15, 2013 by PLC1966

[Dave Fleming]

Just a thought; are we sure that is really one of "ours"? Looking at the reflections in he puddles the intake covers on the starboard wing show USAF covers. I know we are supposed to be keeping things common with the USAF but the lettering on the fuselage also looks a bit odd. As I say, just a thought.

As does the reflection of the port ones - looks like the intake covers are PS'd - but the reflection of the titling says 'ROY...' and it matches the earlier photo.

[tonyot]

Oh I really don`t like this scheme,.......just like the rest of our very small British Armed Forces it is just too `American', along with the uniforms (awful looking combat suits), unit names (especially Army unit names!) and operational doctrine! They have not even got around to putting roundels on the flipping thing yet, but have still photoshopped roundels onto the engine covers instead,....priorities? Or are we intending to break international law and operate them without national markings? Maybe the markings will be magnetic and interchangeable between USAF & USAF?

If they have to make the airframes to a common standard to aid interoperability, then so be it,.....but why paint it to look like a USAF thing too? I`m not a fan of dull overall grey aircraft by a long chalk but I would have preferred it to this abomination! It`s just not cricket,.....more like baseball!

Cheers

Tony O

[Dave Fleming]

FRom the RAF Waddington FB page. The roundel is just visible on the rear fuselage in the first pic - it's a Pale blue/pink one

https://www.facebook.com/RAFWaddington

Edited May 15, 2013 by Dave Fleming

[Seahawk]

I know we British do understated but IMHO those insignificant RAF markings go too far. Did we have a few 51 Sq badge transfers left over from the (rather smaller) Nimrod, then?

As for it looking like a USAF bird, is not some top RAF neddy on record as saying his future vision of the RAF is as something indistinguishable from a USAF expeditionary wing (whatever that is)? Maybe that extends to look and feel as well as equipment and capability. Though it must be said there is a practical reason for the white fuselage top if it's going to spend its time in warmer climes.

[kev67]

I miss the Nimrods already