AMC Expansion plans?

[AD SUPT Hopeful]

I was talking to a crew chief the other day who mentioned that AMC was on a big expansion program. He didn't mention specifics on the reasoning behind this massive push. Are future UPT drops going to resemble those of post Korean-war (all heavies) or this just something straight out of the rumor mill?

 

[HueyPilot]

AMC Changes

The expansion is a result of the US being a much more "expeditionary" fighting force with the elimination and closure of overseas locations and our involvement in many obscure, landlocked nations.

The expansion calls for funding at least 222 C-17 aircraft. Rumors have it that if AMC got what they really wanted, there would be 300+ C-17s on the AMC ramps of the future.

AMC is also giving the C-5 a new avionics upgrade, and is currently trying to budget a re-engining program. This will result in the C-5 lifespan to be extended.

The older C-130E Herks will be retired, and AMC has funded about 60 C-130J and CC-130J aircraft. The CC-130J used to be called the C-130J-30...being the stretched version of the standard Herk. The rest of the Herk fleet (remaining C-130Es, C-130H1/H2/H3 fleet) will receive a massive upgrade resulting in the C-130X. All will have the newer T56-15 engines, and have a glass cockpit and modern wiring resulting in a flightdeck like the C-130J and an electrical system that is compatible fleetwide (so airframes can be swapped out for different missions and not have to be totally rebuilt to do so).

The tanker fleet will see the retirement of the KC-135E and the introduction of the KC-767 (I wish they had just stuck with the normal designation, which would have resulted in the KC-42). 100 are about to be leased from Boeing, and who knows how many more will enter the fleet at a later date. The KC-10 will continue service and at some point will likely become the "old" tanker once the KC-135s are all gone.

AMC will also change aircraft basing as well. Travis, McGuire and Dover will likely see at least one C-17 squadron show up, and the newer C-5Bs will stay at Travis and Dover. The older C-5As will go to former Guard/Reserve C-141 units at Memphis IAP (TNANG) and a WVANG unit. The C-17 will also find itself on the ramp of March ARB (AFRC) and Jackson IAP (MSANG). PACAF will get a couple C-17 squadrons at Hickam and Elmendorf.

The KC-767s will replace -135s at Fairchild, MacDill and Grand Forks. Robins AFB's -135s will go away. The only CONUS -135 unit will be McConnell. ALL of the Guard/Reserve KC-135Es will be retired and replaced with the displaced KC-135Rs coming from the new KC-767 locations (and Robins).

C-130Js have already infiltrated the Guard/Reserve, but will start going to active units at Pope in 2004-2005. Dyess will also likely receive the J at some point. Elmendorf Herks will go away and be replaced with the C-17. At least one Guard Herk unit will convert to the C-5A.

In the future, here's a breakdown of changes that you'll probably see at the various AMC bases:

McChord- C-17s

Fairchild- AD KC-767s, ANG KC-135Rs

Travis- C-5B, KC-10 and C-17

March ARB- C-17

McConnell- KC-135R

Grand Forks- KC-767

Dyess- C-130J

Little Rock- C-130X or C-130J

Charleston- C-17

McGuire- C-17 and KC-10

Dover- C-5 and C-17

Pope- C-130J

MacDill- KC-767

Elmendorf- C-17

Hickam- C-17

Charleston WV- C-5A

Memphis, TN- C-5A

Jackson, MS- C-17

Wright-Patterson- C-5 or C-17

Andrews- C-141s will be replaced by something...haven't heard what...probably C-17 or C-130

To add....drops will not suddenly become all-heavy drops from UPT. It probably won't change significantly from what it is now (about 1/3 fighter, 2/3 heavy).

 

[DHPope93]

Good post. Andrews' -141 unit is in the process of converting to -135Rs. To be the "old tanker" the -10 is going to have to stay in the inventory past the unbelievable year of 2040 (as briefed to us for the -135). I hope to God they retire the -135 faster than that, though.


Peace,
DP

 

[wms]

Does MacDill have a reserve component or IMA program?

 

[maineiac]

Was told it was Martinsburg, WV not Charleston that was getting the C-5. But then again I could be wrong

 

[rainman_02]

We're supposed to get our C-17 squadron here within a year (according to rumor).

I have a C-5 glass cockpit photo somewhere...let me go find it.


Found it:

Now if only they get the GATM mod done for the KC-10...

 

[AArider]

Was told it was Martinsburg, WV not Charleston that was getting the C-5. But then again I could be wrong

That is the word I'm hearing - even from talking to the Martinsburg unit. Of course, the AF must figure out if they are really going to hold onto the C5A, or just replace w/ C17s. Still undecided as far as I know.

 

[KC-10 Driver]

Does MacDill have a reserve component or IMA program?

I have been told by some well-informed and well-placed folks I know at AFRC that the KC-767 bases are not currently planned to have Reserve Associate units.

Seems like a bad idea to me, since I think it will be hard for the AD to man 100 KC-767's in a relatively short period. Plus, almost all the military corporate knowledge on the 767 is in the Reserves (and ANG).

And most importantly, I personally wouldn't mind bidding the Fort Lauderdale base for my day job, and flying the KC-767 at MacDill. Life would be good.

 

[MOOSE]

KC-10 Driver,

I would agree there is a wealth of knowledge regarding the 767 in the civilian world. It would be valuable initially, until sound TTPs are developed, but the unique requirements of employing tankers (i.e. refueling, especially receiver; formation; rendezvous; C2; etc.) wouldn't really lessen the recurrent training requirements of a potential associate reserve element in the KC-767. I would imagine it was similar in the KC-10/DC-10 situation years ago when they were procured. Besides, would an associate reserve unit be able to require civilian 767 experience? If they did, JetBlue types would be out of luck unfortunately:-( How much of an associate reserve unit would really be made up of individuals with 767 experience?

Also, with the way tankers are employed, you get much more bang for the buck equipping reserve units rather than creating associate reserves. When the balloon goes up, and units are activated, the warfighter gets iron (which equals more booms/drogues in the air) as well as flesh. Thus the push to shift the more reliable R-models to replace the E-models in the unit-equipped reserves. In the strat airlift world though, an associate reserves system is better because it increases the UTE rate on the airframes. I'm sure there are a lot of other reasons, but as everyone knows it all really boils down to $$$.

I suppose life can always get better, but I would wager you think life is already good with a position at JetBlue (even without an AFRC KC-767 position at MacDill) .

 

[wms]

I have been told by some well-informed and well-placed folks I know at AFRC that the KC-767 bases are not currently planned to have Reserve Associate units.

Seems like a bad idea to me, since I think it will be hard for the AD to man 100 KC-767's in a relatively short period. Plus, almost all the military corporate knowledge on the 767 is in the Reserves (and ANG).

And most importantly, I personally wouldn't mind bidding the Fort Lauderdale base for my day job, and flying the KC-767 at MacDill. Life would be good.

Thanks for the info, life would be good if...

 

[Spur]

Looks like AETC gets the 1st Active Duty C-130Js:


12/9/2003 - LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE, Ark. (AFPN) -- The Air Force reactivated the 48th Airlift Squadron here Dec. 5, to establish the first active-duty C-130J Hercules training squadron in the Air Force.

The reactivation of the 48th AS, the third flying unit attached to the 314th Airlift Wing here, will train crews in the newest generation of C-130s.

"The mission of the reactivated 48th Airlift Squadron will be to bring to the active-duty Air Force the C-130J and to join its sister units in producing the world's best C-130 aviators," said Col. Joseph Reheiser, 314th AW commander.

Squadron officials have been training the initial cadre of 14 pilots and 10 loadmasters since June with “borrowed” C-130Js from the Air Force Reserve Command's 403rd Wing at Keesler Air Force Base, Miss.

"Despite the fact (the squadron) had no permanently assigned airplanes, no permanently assigned personnel, no budget and no squadron facility, I am proud to announce, that as of (Dec. 4), the entire C-130J cadre (is) qualified," said Col. Doug Kreulen, 314th Operations Group commander.

Little Rock's first base-assigned C-130J is receiving its final touches in Marietta, Ga., and will be completed in early 2004. It will become the first active-duty C-130J in the Air Force.

The C-130J provides 40-percent more range and flies 24-percent faster than the C-130E and H models. The new model is also capable of taking off on shorter runways and has avionics that allow for better data capability and control. The J models are also larger, with enough room to transport 128 people compared to the 92-troop capacity of earlier models.

The fully automated flight deck allows for a smaller crew of three compared to a crew of five in the E and H models.

The reactivation of the 48th AS at Little Rock marks a historical benchmark for the unit, officials said.

"Just as it did in World War II, the Berlin Airlift and Korea, the 48th will play a significant role in the ongoing fight for freedom," Reheiser said.

The 48th was formed as the 48th Transportation Squadron in May 1942 and was redesignated, inactivated and reactivated numerous times in the past century. (Courtesy of Air Education and Training Command News Service)

 

[10early?]

No C-5's in CRW

Certainly it must be Martinsburg that is getting C-5's. Charlie West only has a 6300 ft. runway, and it's a little sporty getting in there sometimes in a 130. VERY hilly. (Martinsburg has a lot more congressional pull, too). I'm sure the great guys in CRW are breathing a sigh of relief

 

[dudemize]

It is Martinsburg that is getting the C-5s.

I'm a Dover reservist and have been pondering a switch from the C-5 to the C-17 but am leaning towards staying with the C-5. Mostly because I don't want to go back to Altus, OK for 4 more months for initial training. Another reason is the increased currency requirements for the C-17. Right now my squadron is slated to stay with the C-5 and our sister squadron is converting to C-17s so I would have to change squadrons as well.

 

[Daddy]

Any idea when the final word will come down on the C-5's going to Martinsburg or when any of that will happen?

 

[dudemize]

Last I heard they were still doing environmental impact studies so will probably be a while. They still have to build new hangars up there and I think they are looking at extending the runway. I'd say 2 years at the earliest. I might look into going there myself.

 

[potrack]

767 on hold??

I heard the 767 tanker was on hold right now......
The 'man' is not sure if he wants to commit the money or else there is some contract wrangling going on.

So I've heard the program isn't a done deal yet. Heard that from a friend who works on the KC-767 program.

Seems like for the lift, legs and offload they should have stepped up to the 777 or A330.

It will be interesting to see how AMC shakes out in a few years. Lately I've seen more people getting off of AD...even though the Majors aren't hiring right now.

 

[potrack]

767 canx

Just heard that about a month and a half ago, May or June-ish time frame,

the USAF cancelled the 767 project. Sorry -135 dudes......gotta keep on wearing those David-Clarks and sweatin' your balls off.