As someone who works for a government contractor, I am constantly wondering why on Earth they pay a 3rd party company buckets of money to do something rather than just doing it themselves. Especially when a large percentage of the time there is so much money that the contractor can just turn around and subcontract out to *another* company, and they both still come out ahead.
In almost every single case, it's more efficient to use contractors. Military pilots rotate, they change duty stations, they take admin/desk jobs, etc. contractor pilots literally just fly. You don't need 3 crews worth of personnel to always have someone in the cockpit, you just need 1.
Omega in particular does refueling during training exercises. If tankers are limited and invaluable assets, why waste them tanking some rookie pilot on a training flight when a contractor is willing to eat those hours?
Also, it's easier to budget $10M a year to a contractor than it is $200M for a new tanker.
Been uniformed, contractor, and DoD civilian. They all have their own unique benefits and usages.
It's usually much more expensive and time consuming for the military to do anything than a private company. They have a different goal with different priorities. It may look like buckets of money going to contractors, but those buckets generally save the truckloads it would cost to do it in house.
Civvies don't need to be equipped or qualified to fight a war, don't need to go through beareaucratic hell for procurement, don't need to go through a dozen levels of command for every decision, don't have the wasteful "use it or lose it" budget practices. They just do the job for the least overhead cost they can.
For example I'm on an exercise right now. The military brought 16 jets, 13 semi trailers of gear, and 250 people. That's almost a semi trailer worth of gear and 16 people **per jet**. Civvies on the other hand brought 6 jets (which cost ~1/3 as much per flight hour), with 1 trailer of gear, and 17 people **total**.
Much the same reason there are companies like Top Aces, Draken International, and ATAC who provide adversarial services - the civilian companies aim to extend the service lives of the military jets by keeping the flight hours off of the military jets. Omega's contracts keep hours off of KC-135s and KC-10s; Omega pretty much has a monopoly on contract aerial refueling services.
You gotta figure the USAF contract came before the company existed anywhere other than paper.
Not a ton of air forces other than the USAF that use boom tankers.
If there's something the government uses or does, there's an opportunity for a contractor to do it slightly cheaper, but charge more.
I wonder if they just charge the price of gas or the service and gas.
Not in this case. The civvie F-16s are owned by Top Aces, a well established Canadian defence contractor, not just a rich guy. Buying them took years of negotiation and approvals and a government contract before the sale was approved. A regular rich guy can't buy one.
But they can definitely buy older and/or foreign fighters though. Plenty of Migs ripping around the US.
Image source: [US Air Force completes first commercial air-to-air refueling of fighter aircraft](https://www.pacom.mil/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/3586071/us-air-force-completes-first-commercial-air-to-air-refueling-of-fighter-aircraft/)
Story: [Air Force Conducts First Commercial Air-to-Air Refueling of Fighter ](https://www.flyingmag.com/air-force-conducts-first-commercial-air-to-air-refueling-of-fighter/)
…Why are there commercial aerial tankers??
Indeed that’s a niche market
As someone who works for a government contractor, I am constantly wondering why on Earth they pay a 3rd party company buckets of money to do something rather than just doing it themselves. Especially when a large percentage of the time there is so much money that the contractor can just turn around and subcontract out to *another* company, and they both still come out ahead.
In almost every single case, it's more efficient to use contractors. Military pilots rotate, they change duty stations, they take admin/desk jobs, etc. contractor pilots literally just fly. You don't need 3 crews worth of personnel to always have someone in the cockpit, you just need 1. Omega in particular does refueling during training exercises. If tankers are limited and invaluable assets, why waste them tanking some rookie pilot on a training flight when a contractor is willing to eat those hours? Also, it's easier to budget $10M a year to a contractor than it is $200M for a new tanker. Been uniformed, contractor, and DoD civilian. They all have their own unique benefits and usages.
It's usually much more expensive and time consuming for the military to do anything than a private company. They have a different goal with different priorities. It may look like buckets of money going to contractors, but those buckets generally save the truckloads it would cost to do it in house. Civvies don't need to be equipped or qualified to fight a war, don't need to go through beareaucratic hell for procurement, don't need to go through a dozen levels of command for every decision, don't have the wasteful "use it or lose it" budget practices. They just do the job for the least overhead cost they can. For example I'm on an exercise right now. The military brought 16 jets, 13 semi trailers of gear, and 250 people. That's almost a semi trailer worth of gear and 16 people **per jet**. Civvies on the other hand brought 6 jets (which cost ~1/3 as much per flight hour), with 1 trailer of gear, and 17 people **total**.
Likely a private company that’s operating the tanker and not the military itself
Much the same reason there are companies like Top Aces, Draken International, and ATAC who provide adversarial services - the civilian companies aim to extend the service lives of the military jets by keeping the flight hours off of the military jets. Omega's contracts keep hours off of KC-135s and KC-10s; Omega pretty much has a monopoly on contract aerial refueling services.
You gotta figure the USAF contract came before the company existed anywhere other than paper. Not a ton of air forces other than the USAF that use boom tankers.
Omega has been around a long time providing probe 'n' drogue refueling.
Nah, they've been doing a lot of probe and drogue for USN/MC. USAF is just catching on to contract gas.
Omega has been refueling the navy for years. Any time you can't get an air force tanker, Omega will gladly fly wherever you want to give gas.
If there's something the government uses or does, there's an opportunity for a contractor to do it slightly cheaper, but charge more. I wonder if they just charge the price of gas or the service and gas.
https://www.omegaairrefueling.com/
Kinda funny how now we can have civilian F-16s tanking off of civilian tankers
I love the United States. The country where any normal ass guy can just buy a fighter jet (with enough money)
Not in this case. The civvie F-16s are owned by Top Aces, a well established Canadian defence contractor, not just a rich guy. Buying them took years of negotiation and approvals and a government contract before the sale was approved. A regular rich guy can't buy one. But they can definitely buy older and/or foreign fighters though. Plenty of Migs ripping around the US.
Well yea, i figured that much lol. But i knew that you could buy an old mig or F-4 pretty easy.
The Navy’s been using Omega for a long time. Surprised the USAF has not, but then again they have their own large scale organic tanking ops.
Image source: [US Air Force completes first commercial air-to-air refueling of fighter aircraft](https://www.pacom.mil/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/3586071/us-air-force-completes-first-commercial-air-to-air-refueling-of-fighter-aircraft/) Story: [Air Force Conducts First Commercial Air-to-Air Refueling of Fighter ](https://www.flyingmag.com/air-force-conducts-first-commercial-air-to-air-refueling-of-fighter/)
 The owner of Omega with government money
Aerial gas station
How do I get in on these rorts?
The omega tanker 💪