"Mary Shafer" wrote in message
...
On 30 Mar 2004 14:25:41 -0800, (sid) wrote:

Ron Parsons wrote in message
...
In article ,
(sid) wrote:

Ron Parsons wrote in message
...
In article ,
The point was that the wing structure and lift capability are there to
be used in a tanker model.

However, these aircraft are to be as stock as possible. Thats
especially true of those being leased. It would be damned expensive to
recertify just a few obsolescent aircraft, so I doubt the AF will
spend the money for additional weight certification.

The USAF doesn't care about certification, so being stock or not
doesn't much matter except for maintenance issues. The USAF will do
the usual CAT I/II acceptance testing, which isn't very much like
certification.

The USAF cares greatly about certification issues. Any modification that
violates the civil Type Certificate of the airplane greatly reduces the
value of the airplane. The E4Bs have correct civil certification paperwork
for any changes made for USAF. Civil certification is a probabilities
basis.

Perhaps you are unaware that the current Chief Scientist at Dryden is behind
the 8 ball over a lack of 25.1309 capability. Manufacturers will no longer
participate based on the half assed methods used by her predecessor.