Boeing MQ-25 Uncrewed Tanker

[MIflyer]

I do not recall seeing a picture of the MQ-25 before with this amount of detail. Makes you wonder if tankers can carry drop tanks.

From Avweb:

"A new financial charge on the MQ-25 program in Boeing's second-quarter results raises the company's total losses on the uncrewed aerial tanker to 54% of the value of the engineering and manufacturing development contract. Boeing reported a $147 million charge on the MQ-25 program."

 

[FLYBOYJ]

There's been quite a few photos throughout the internet, but the first thing I notice is this UAV carries an "N" number

 

[GrauGeist]

There's been quite a few photos throughout the internet, but the first thing I notice is this UAV carries an "N" number

Company owned test aircraft, perhaps?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Company owned test aircraft, perhaps?

Possibly or the DD250 not signed off.

When I worked for Lockheed in the early 80s, the CP-140s (Canadian P-3s) were test flown out of Burbank with N numbers and carried "experimental" airworthiness certificates. When the Canadians took delivery, the airworthiness certificates were surrendered to the FAA and the N Number removed.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

There's been quite a few photos throughout the internet, but the first thing I notice is this UAV carries an "N" number

They always do during the testing phase.

They are building it just down the road from us here in St. Louis.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Company owned test aircraft, perhaps?

It is our test aircraft, at this stage they always have an N number.

 

[MIflyer]

Funny thing. Back when they were going to fly the X-34 first from New Mexico and then from the Cape for the longer range missions, the people in NM found out that it was unmanned and panicked. I got a call from the Pentagon and they asked me, "What happens if it is landing at the Cape and a fire truck pulls out onto the runway?" They literally had a question on that directed to them! I told them that the X-34 would hit the fire truck, but that we did not let our fire trucks run out onto an active runway with an operation underway. They asked if we were worried about the X-34 being unmanned. I replied that we were not at all worried; almost nothing we supported at the Cape had anyone driving it, and the Skid Strip was built to enable unmanned cruise missiles to land.

They moved the X-34 program from NM to Edwards AFB as a result of the panic associated with it being unmanned. I guess that there has been more acceptance of UAVs since then.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Funny thing. Back when they were going to fly the X-34 first from New Mexico and then from the Cape for the longer range missions, the people in NM found out that it was unmanned and panicked. I got a call from the Pentagon and they asked me, "What happens if it is landing at the Cape and a fire truck pulls out onto the runway?" They literally had a question on that directed to them! I told them that the X-34 would hit the fire truck, but that we did not let our fire trucks run out onto an active runway with an operation underway. They asked if we were worried about the X-34 being unmanned. I replied that we were not at all worried; almost nothing we supported at the Cape had anyone driving it, and the Skid Strip was built to enable unmanned cruise missiles to land.

They moved the X-34 program from NM to Edwards AFB as a result of the panic associated with it being unmanned. I guess that there has been more acceptance of UAVs since then.

I live out near the test area where they fly the MQ-25 and other aircraft. I see the T-7 all the time, but have not seen the MQ-25 yet.

 

[Snautzer01]

What a good looking airframe. Except for the tail. Need a big ole b-17 , b-29 tail. I will sent a fax about that. That will sort them out.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

What a good looking airframe. Except for the tail. Need a big ole b-17 , b-29 tail. I will sent a fax about that. That will sort them out.

"Stealth? We don't need no steenkin' stealth!"

 

[GTX]

There's been quite a few photos throughout the internet, but the first thing I notice is this UAV carries an "N" number

Yeah, plenty of images and video about. Start with here:

MQ-25

Boeing is bringing the future of unmanned aircraft carrier aviation to the U.S. Navy with the MQ-25.

www.boeing.com

 

[MIflyer]

I notice they seem to be using the fan powered buddy pack external store refueling units for probe and drouge refuling. I would have expected them to make the refueling capability integral, but given that the other role of the aircraft is ECM I suppose the external stores approach makes more sense.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I notice they seem to be using the fan powered buddy pack external store refueling units for probe and drouge refuling. I would have expected them to make the refueling capability integral, but given that the other role of the aircraft is ECM I suppose the external stores approach makes more sense.

Cheap and operationally flexible seems like a good choice, even if the fuelie angle gets a little short-shrift.

 

[SaparotRob]

Let it complain to its shop steward.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Seeing an "N" number on this brings up another point. I'm going to assume that when they did the air-to-air refueling trials it was done in a MOA. The reason why I bring this up, about 22 years ago I worked on a modification program where we converted a 707 into a tanker. Now before you say "I think someone else has already done that," our mod consisted of a refueling module that can be removed from the aircraft along with the extra tankage and then the aircraft can be operated as a transport or covertly converted into a tanker. The program was known as "Omega."

When it came time for us to do air-to-air refueling testing, the FAA gave us a bunch of grief, in their opinion, once the refueling hose contacted the receiving aircraft, it was considered a "mid-air"!!! Eventually we were able to do the test in a MOA north of Edwards AFB.

I'm wondering if the FAA has the same (dumb) requirement on this aircraft?

There were several of these aircraft modified after the one I worked on;

The one I did work on did not have a long life!

Photo of Boeing 707-321B N707AR - Aviation Safety Network

Photo of Boeing 707-321B N707AR taken by NTSB at Port Hueneme-Point Mugu NAS, CA (NTD/KNTD)

aviation-safety.net

What's funny was the tail section of this mod was really gone through, some of the structure was removed and replaced 3 times, it looks like it survived the crash pretty well!

photos courtesy of the internet!

 

[GrauGeist]

Well, the cause of the zero-ground convergence is obvious.
The horseshoe is painted upside down - all the luck ran out!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Seeing an "N" number on this brings up another point. I'm going to assume that when they did the air-to-air refueling trials it was done in a MOA. The reason why I bring this up, about 22 years ago I worked on a modification program where we converted a 707 into a tanker. Now before you say "I think someone else has already done that," our mod consisted of a refueling module that can be removed from the aircraft along with the extra tankage and then the aircraft can be operated as a transport or covertly converted into a tanker. The program was known as "Omega."

When it came time for us to do air-to-air refueling testing, the FAA gave us a bunch of grief, in their opinion, once the refueling hose contacted the receiving aircraft, it was considered a "mid-air"!!! Eventually we were able to do the test in a MOA north of Edwards AFB.

I'm wondering if the FAA has the same (dumb) requirement on this aircraft?

There were several of these aircraft modified after the one I worked on;

View attachment 679615

The one I did work on did not have a long life!

View attachment 679616

Photo of Boeing 707-321B N707AR - Aviation Safety Network

Photo of Boeing 707-321B N707AR taken by NTSB at Port Hueneme-Point Mugu NAS, CA (NTD/KNTD)

aviation-safety.net

What's funny was the tail section of this mod was really gone through, some of the structure was removed and replaced 3 times, it looks like it survived the crash pretty well!

photos courtesy of the internet!

The current test airplane has an N number and is company owned.

All tests so far have been conducted in yhe test area here near St. Louis in Illinois (and I think Missouri as well).

It currently has refueled am F-18F, E-2D, and F-35C.

MQ-25 Stingray Tests Move Forward With First F-35C Lightning II Air-To-Air Refueling

Following the F/A-18F Super Hornet and the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, the unmanned MQ-25 tanker was now tested in conjunction with the F-35, moving at a fast

theaviationist.com

 

[MIflyer]

Here is an idea. Just forget about the stealth features and make the UAV tanker look like a flying saucer. Even if they see it, no one will even report it.

 

[GrauGeist]

Brilliant!

 

[Chuck]

it may be the sci-fi fan in me but we are getting into the realm of the movie Stealth here.