Air refuelling mishaps

A few scary, especially the E3A at the end. Lot of the jets trying to fly slow enough to stay behind a prop tanker. To much high AOA and poor controllability at slow speeds.
 
The title is a little misleading as most of it was just the normal buffoonery of getting plugged in to the tanker and staying there. I didn't know the AF used the drogue back then, It kind of looked like either flight testing or students trying it. The E-3 and the 53 were pretty bad, not sure why the E-3 guy yanked the nose up. I wouldn't have wanted to be in the back for that breakaway.
 
Last edited:
Agreed on the somewhat misleading title. The second clip (at about 10 seconds) was a test flight of a successful hose cut from a Super Hornet. Everything that happened there was supposed to happen.
 
No experience, but I assume it's an "oh ****" moment when your refueling probe goes through your rotor. Are those things designed to be frangible?
 
F-104 fueling from a B-29 wow. Didn't know B-29s were fuelers unless it was a test or experiment.
 
The "B-29"s were actually KB-50s I believe. Some of the first operational tankers.

Yes did a search and what you wrote is correct. Think what I read was they retired them in 1956. Thanks.
 
Single pilot flight East Coast to Turkey in a single seat fighter. Air refueling along the way. That is a long flight. And if you screw up the refueling??? Earn your pay on that one.
 
One doesn't want any PIO going in. Yeah, a fair amount may be in the 'student' category.

I really didn't care for the stiff hose on the KC-135. It took a bit of effort to keep the 'U' in the hose. It's best to refuel in the mid altitudes, above any thermals, but at least in 'thick air'.
 
One doesn't want any PIO going in. Yeah, a fair amount may be in the 'student' category.

I really didn't care for the stiff hose on the KC-135. It took a bit of effort to keep the 'U' in the hose. It's best to refuel in the mid altitudes, above any thermals, but at least in 'thick air'.

How could you tell the hose was stiff? How did that affect refueling?
 
Too much Viagra can do that! :D

Couldn't help it.
 
image.jpeg image.jpeg No mishaps but it was neat watching the "ballet."
 
Single pilot flight East Coast to Turkey in a single seat fighter. Air refueling along the way. That is a long flight. And if you screw up the refueling??? Earn your pay on that one.
All our ocean crossings have the fuel planned where you can get to a divert if you miss a refueling. There are a few spots in the Pacific that you can't get to a divert, but it's a pretty short timeframe. The first few ocean crossings get your attention; after 7 or 8 they are pretty routine.

The last one I did my jet wouldn't connect to the KC-10; the 135 that we started with was fine, but on the -10 it wouldn't lock into place. I talked them into "pressure refueling" me all the way across. Wasn't that big of a deal, but I'm glad it was me and not one of my young wingmen.
 
Can't recall the exact story but didn't a KC97 or KC135 connect to an F4 in Vietnam and "pull" the fighter to safe territory for ejection?
 
Can't recall the exact story but didn't a KC97 or KC135 connect to an F4 in Vietnam and "pull" the fighter to safe territory for ejection?
How would you pull them?

There WAS a case in Vietnam of a F-4 that was badly damaged and his wingman had him drop the hook and the wingman literally flew the nose of his F-4 into the notch and pushed him to where the damaged crew could safely eject. Is that what you were thinking of.
 
How would you pull them?

There WAS a case in Vietnam of a F-4 that was badly damaged and his wingman had him drop the hook and the wingman literally flew the nose of his F-4 into the notch and pushed him to where the damaged crew could safely eject. Is that what you were thinking of.

Read about that one too, but I swear I red about the tanker 'pulling' the fighter somehow. I realize it makes no sense but many things happened in 'Nam that didn't make any sense. I'll see if I can find something.
 
Read about that one too, but I swear I red about the tanker 'pulling' the fighter somehow. I realize it makes no sense but many things happened in 'Nam that didn't make any sense. I'll see if I can find something.
It's happened a few times over the past couple of decades. But it's not exactly what you're thinking. I believe what you're talking about is a tanker hooking up to a badly damaged fighter, one who's leaking fuel so quickly that the tanker and fighter have to stay hooked up with the tanker constantly pumping gas to feed the crippled fighter until they can get over friendly territory.

KC-135 urban legend is that during the first Gulf War, a tanker crew went into Iraq to rescue a damaged fighter, and the crew almost hanged for it. Tankers at the time weren't allowed into country. These guys went from almost losing their wings to getting Air Medals once the fighter guys got involved.

More recently: http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/...-pilot-ejecting-over-isis-territory/80232166/
 
Last edited:
How would you pull them?

There WAS a case in Vietnam of a F-4 that was badly damaged and his wingman had him drop the hook and the wingman literally flew the nose of his F-4 into the notch and pushed him to where the damaged crew could safely eject. Is that what you were thinking of.
Known as Pardo's Push
http://www.historynet.com/pardos-push-an-incredible-feat-of-airmanship.htm
ppush.jpg
 
Sluggo I believe you're right, it may have been the F4 leaking fuel. Also knew about the tanker deal during the Gulf War. I believe Air Force magazine had an article on it. I'd forgotten about Pardo's Push so that may have me mixed up on the tanker 'pulling' deal. Thanks!
 
I know there was an F-105 in Nam that flamed out due to fuel starvation. A KC-135 dove in front of him and the pilot glided into a hook up. Took on enough fuel to get a relight. All aircraft returned safely.
 
I know there was an F-105 in Nam that flamed out due to fuel starvation. A KC-135 dove in front of him and the pilot glided into a hook up. Took on enough fuel to get a relight. All aircraft returned safely.
Hmmm, some of these stories seem pretty fantastic. I think there is probably some truth to a story that gets exaggerated over time. Not saying it didn't happen, but I don't see how that's possible. I can't imagine flaming out and still working to get gas instead of transitioning to bailout mode.
 
Hmmm, some of these stories seem pretty fantastic. I think there is probably some truth to a story that gets exaggerated over time. Not saying it didn't happen, but I don't see how that's possible. I can't imagine flaming out and still working to get gas instead of transitioning to bailout mode.

All the way down to "Over The Fence."

https://sites.google.com/site/arclightyoungtiger/that-s-a-save---young-tigers

If it is true, that's one heck of a bit of flying.
 
I can't imagine flaming out and still working to get gas instead of transitioning to bailout mode.

Wouldn't you be trying everything and anything instead of spending 7 years at the Hanoi Hilton? Cmon man.
 
Some of the biggest were probably not caught on tape. During lemay and sac, lots of inflight refuelings turned out badly, especially the B50s and the KC97s. Both were too slow to refuel the B47 and or the B52. Add to that the inherent problems with the radial engines and props on the 97. Had to be descending to stay ahead! Some were involved in fatal accidents where the 47 or the 52 were carrying atomic weapons. Hence the KC 135. The KC97 was gone by the Vietnam disaster.the story of the 135 diving to refuel the flame out is probably bar room lore.
 
I'm pretty sure with the E-3, the 135 autopilot kicked off. At least that is what it looked like from the clip.
 
I'm pretty sure with the E-3, the 135 autopilot kicked off. At least that is what it looked like from the clip.
I didn't catch that before, it does kind of look like it after watching it a few times.
 

Signed by Bob and two of the other guys involved, hanging in the basement.

50c06bb2a89d70ec8760edf4e6420328.jpg


fd07695ff057404853a7e73457c55adc.jpg


Original painting commissioned as a fundraiser for the fourth guy who had an expensive medical condition. Mine is a numbered print, and it's by far the largest piece of artwork I own - it's huge. Given to us by a friend as a gift. Still, framing it cost a small fortune many many years ago.

@Everskyward has flown with Bob. Don't know if he's retired now, or not. None of my business really.

Have a second print that's smaller of another couple of hours of Bob's life. He ended up outnumbered by something like 8 to 1 with Migs and in a huge Luftberry circle totally defensive and managed to get out of that one alive, also.

That print is titled "Wheel in the Middle of the Air" and is also signed. Also done as a fundraiser, I believe. Again, received as a gift from another pilot and friend. I'd shoot a photo of that one but it (embarrassingly) got dropped and the glass is cracked in the frame and I haven't done anything about it in quite some time.

I chuckle at the signature, since my friend who had it signed knows I go by "Nate", but for some reason told Bob to sign it the formal "Nathan", which is oddly humorous to me because there's only two other people on the planet who regularly call me that, my mom... "I didn't name you Nate!" and my first flight instructor -- who I've never figured out why he does it, but he heard my grandparents use it from time to time and it "stuck". He always used to joke during flight training, "Pay attention Nathan, there's going to be a test!" Heh. And he still calls me that to this day, a couple of decades later.

So two people I admire highly stick with my original first name, and somehow the signature on the print also ends up that way? Interesting coincidence.
 
Back
Top