Jacek & all,

I think the "what's better" aspects of hose-and-drogue versus flying boom refueling should really focus on the relative maneuverability of the "tankee" aircraft.

A "heavy" like a B-52 has considerably more inertia than a small pointy-nose like the F/A-18. So it makes much more sense to fuel heavies with a flying boom, which does not have as much inertia to overcome when close-in maneuvering is needed.

While a hose-and-drogue will "dance" much more in the airstream, the disparity in inertia between it and a small aircraft is much less. The F/A-18 and similar can more easily "dance" with the basket than a "heavy" might.

This doesn't make hose-and-drogue plugs - especially night plugs - any nicer for the "tankee," though. The emphasis is still on the "tankee" to successfully plug...

....and hope the package is "sweet."

--
Mike Kanze

"Life is like a roll of toilet paper. The closer it gets to the end, the faster it goes."

- Anonymous

wrote in message ups.com...
Many tanker aircraft that employ the hose-and-drogue system, can simultaneously
employ two such mechanisms - and, refuel two aircraft simultaneously. The boom,
however, can dispense fuel faster than a hose-and-drogue.

I am not sure, what is the opinion on that of this group, but I guess
the hose-and-drogue system must be cheaper, though seems to required
more pilot skills (as the only one to get the connection, with no
operator from the tanker manoeuvering the device).

Also, hose-and-drogue is more, "portable", easier to adapt on smaller
planes (can you imagine F/A-18E with the flying boom?;-)))

Navy and Marine Corps strike packages - often composed of 24 aircraft - have
required as many as four KC-135s to meet their refueling needs.

The same task could demand 12 (a full squadron) of Super Hornets
configured as tankers.

F/A-18E/F squadron VFA-115 flew 623 sorties between March 21, 2003 and April 9,
2003: 216 were refueling sorties.

Gosh! It is over 33%!

When equipped to refuel other aircraft, Super Hornets carry only self
defense weapons and are not equipped to conduct attack operations.

Not the whole truth, I think. Some Super Hornets can carry an AGM-65
Maverick when flying RTKR/SSC missions. But I guess that due to the
small space between outboard and mid weapon stations the number of fuel
tanks then must be reduced to 3 (2 tanks + ARS, to be exact)??? Could
somebody confirm that?

Best regards,
Jacek Zemlo