Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

vanessa_ca

(870 posts)
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 06:15 PM 18 hrs ago

KC-135 tanker involved in Epic Fury goes down in Iraq: CENTCOM

Source: Breaking Defense



WASHINGTON — A US Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker air refueler crashed in Iraq due to an “incident” that “occurred in friendly airspace,” US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement late Thursday.

Casualties and circumstances surrounding the crash are not immediately clear. According to CENTCOM, the incident was “not due to hostile or friendly fire” and occurred during Operation Epic Fury, the US military’s name for the war against Iran.

Three US F-15s were recently shot down over Kuwait in a friendly fire incident, but all pilots involved ejected safely. The Stratotanker, however, does not have ejection seats. CENTCOM said “rescue efforts are ongoing.”

Two aircraft were apparently involved in events that precipitated the tanker’s crash, though it’s not clear if it occurred amid a refueling mission. The other aircraft “landed safely” according to CENTCOM, which did not describe the aircraft in question.

Read more: https://breakingdefense.com/2026/03/kc-135-tanker-involved-in-epic-fury-goes-down-in-iraq-centcom/

55 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
KC-135 tanker involved in Epic Fury goes down in Iraq: CENTCOM (Original Post) vanessa_ca 18 hrs ago OP
based on the 707. these ancient craft must be heck to maintain nt msongs 18 hrs ago #1
I know, my Dad was flying them in Viet Nam. Irish_Dem 17 hrs ago #3
They fly out of Seymour Johnston AFB DenaliDemocrat 2 hrs ago #51
I think it is a Boeing 707 frame. Irish_Dem 1 hr ago #54
I was an AWACS crewmember Puppyjive 16 hrs ago #18
Actually it's based on a dash 80. The KC-135 was about a year ahead of the 707. Angleae 9 hrs ago #44
But no consideration for crew viability? OAITW r.2.0 8 hrs ago #45
None RoseTrellis 2 hrs ago #49
Thank you! KT2000 2 hrs ago #52
Oh no.... Irish_Dem 17 hrs ago #2
Not good. A second KC 135 "landed safely in Israel" vanessa_ca 17 hrs ago #6
Crew of six. Irish_Dem 16 hrs ago #14
In flight refueling has inherent risks. OAITW r.2.0 17 hrs ago #4
It's weird that both affected planes were refuelers Prairie Gates 17 hrs ago #9
That is odd... 2naSalit 17 hrs ago #12
I saw two of the Pegasus tankers very close tonekat 15 hrs ago #24
That's what I saw... 2naSalit 15 hrs ago #25
I didn't know that it involved 2 KC-135 tankers. That's really crazy. I have to believe each tanker has at least OAITW r.2.0 16 hrs ago #13
CENTCOM's only saying two aircraft Prairie Gates 15 hrs ago #20
I would think mid-air refueling tankers are closely watched to avoid this very situation. OAITW r.2.0 15 hrs ago #21
Pic downthread would seem to confirm that both the crashed aircraft and the safely landed one Prairie Gates 13 hrs ago #32
Why would that happen? OAITW r.2.0 12 hrs ago #35
Unlikely... 2naSalit 17 hrs ago #11
I didn't know all the facts when I posted. OAITW r.2.0 16 hrs ago #16
It's a reasonable one but... 2naSalit 15 hrs ago #22
True story....worked at a gas bottling plant in Portland, Maine for 8 months, We bottled from bulk,. OAITW r.2.0 12 hrs ago #37
Not avgas RoseTrellis 3 hrs ago #47
That was after my time... 2naSalit 38 min ago #55
I remember when one blew up over Illinois in 1982 Hassin Bin Sober 12 hrs ago #33
Just got a Guardian breaking news banner BumRushDaShow 17 hrs ago #5
I'm going to call this one: add three to the KIA tally Prairie Gates 17 hrs ago #7
I hope not, but I fear you're right -eom vanessa_ca 17 hrs ago #10
Anything approved for news by this administration is suspect CentralMass 17 hrs ago #8
No ejection seats on this aircraft. mn9driver 16 hrs ago #15
Given the danger of this flight requirement....seems like ejection seats for the pilots and the OAITW r.2.0 16 hrs ago #17
Might be a side door... 2naSalit 15 hrs ago #23
Pretty doubtful. Once they are locked into their seat, given their situation...not a lot of time to figure a quick exit OAITW r.2.0 15 hrs ago #26
Hmm... 2naSalit 15 hrs ago #27
Let's say you lose a wing or tail at 35,000 ft, flying at 450mph.. OAITW r.2.0 14 hrs ago #29
They don't even have parachutes anymore vanessa_ca 12 hrs ago #36
So, help me understand. Fighter pilots need ejection support,,,,but tanker pilots don't? OAITW r.2.0 11 hrs ago #38
That's my logical understanding, but I can't add anything vanessa_ca 11 hrs ago #39
While I am a pilot.... OAITW r.2.0 10 hrs ago #41
Compared to 0 hours in no seat of any Cessna (me) lol vanessa_ca 9 hrs ago #43
Not just tankers. RoseTrellis 3 hrs ago #48
mission scope is different, and structure wise its very different DetroitLegalBeagle 1 hr ago #53
The Epstein Administration will be claiming the media is trying to make it look bad. Marcuse 15 hrs ago #19
Fatigue Maninacan 15 hrs ago #28
Pic of KC-135 after landing in Tel Aviv with nearly half of its vertical stabilizer torn away vanessa_ca 13 hrs ago #30
Mid-air collision between two KC-135s is the claim from CENTCOM, then Prairie Gates 13 hrs ago #31
I know vanessa_ca 12 hrs ago #34
Tankers do not collide on mission. They are totally controlled by AWACs on theater, OAITW r.2.0 10 hrs ago #42
The Stratotanker, however, does not have ejection seats. CENTCOM said "rescue efforts are ongoing." riversedge 10 hrs ago #40
The pilots, the crew, and the planes would all be fine if not for Trump's unneeded war Botany 4 hrs ago #46
Operation Epic Fuckup. milestogo 2 hrs ago #50

Irish_Dem

(80,929 posts)
3. I know, my Dad was flying them in Viet Nam.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 06:27 PM
17 hrs ago

Many decades ago.

I am surprised they still fly them.

DenaliDemocrat

(1,767 posts)
51. They fly out of Seymour Johnston AFB
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 10:05 AM
2 hrs ago

And are all retro fitted with modern equipment. I believe they are built on a 737 frame but I could be remembering incorrectly.

Irish_Dem

(80,929 posts)
54. I think it is a Boeing 707 frame.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 10:48 AM
1 hr ago

I’m not sure.

During the Vietnam war they were stationed in a number of locations in the far east.

Puppyjive

(979 posts)
18. I was an AWACS crewmember
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:22 PM
16 hrs ago

They have retired the jets. There are a handful still in operation. I feel sick to my stomach over this.

KT2000

(22,111 posts)
52. Thank you!
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 10:22 AM
2 hrs ago

That was my Dad's plane (Boeing engineer) from its beginning until 1973 and everyone gets it wrong. People think the KC-135 was adapted from the 707. I love watching the takeoff videos of that plane - the loud ones!

Irish_Dem

(80,929 posts)
2. Oh no....
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 06:25 PM
17 hrs ago

Last edited Thu Mar 12, 2026, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

My USAF Dad flew these in Viet Nam.
KC 135.

Best squadron in the USAF.

The crew got out here but where are they?

vanessa_ca

(870 posts)
6. Not good. A second KC 135 "landed safely in Israel"
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 06:46 PM
17 hrs ago
CBS News reported that a second KC-135 safely landed in Israel after declaring an emergency earlier on Thursday.

CENTCOM assured that the incident occured in friendly airspace, and was not due to hostile or friendly fire.

https://www.jpost.com/international/article-889839


It was reported a bit differently at first


/photo/1

Irish_Dem

(80,929 posts)
14. Crew of six.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:02 PM
16 hrs ago

Pilot, co-pilot, maybe navigator, boom operator, maybe some medical staff.
RN's or med techs?

IDK.

The plane is lost?

Air Force families know this is a not a good statement from the brass.
It is not good when the USAF loses track of an airplane.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
4. In flight refueling has inherent risks.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 06:28 PM
17 hrs ago

Aviation fuel is hi-octane fluid...Maybe some sparking during the process during the refuel process.

Prairie Gates

(7,957 posts)
9. It's weird that both affected planes were refuelers
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 07:01 PM
17 hrs ago

When I first heard the story I assumed that there has been some kind of problem with the refueling itself, but if they are both KC-135s, I don't get it. Surely they weren't refueling each other.

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
12. That is odd...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 07:25 PM
17 hrs ago

But I will say that I have witnessed training events where refueling tankers were working in tandem such that they were not all that far apart as they acted as a two pump fuel station. I don;t know what their actual practices are but I can imagine that safety measures are being slimmed down for everything related to operations ordered by the clowns in DC.

tonekat

(2,515 posts)
24. I saw two of the Pegasus tankers very close
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:48 PM
15 hrs ago

It was in 2024, I saw them coming when I was looking at my flight software. They weren't even following a refueling route, and the software said they were 25 feet apart vertically. They looked like one plane with two sets of wings from my backyard.

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
25. That's what I saw...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:57 PM
15 hrs ago

At one point. For some reason, I assume a training session, but they weren't extremely far up, I heard them coming long before they crossed the valley. I watched them go over once and then again about two hours later, I was out working a field on a farm so that was in 2019.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
13. I didn't know that it involved 2 KC-135 tankers. That's really crazy. I have to believe each tanker has at least
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:02 PM
16 hrs ago

a 10 mile separation radius around their refuel sector flightpath.

Prairie Gates

(7,957 posts)
20. CENTCOM's only saying two aircraft
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:35 PM
15 hrs ago

Some sources I saw said the plane that landed safely was also a KC 135 but I'm not sure that's accurate and I agree that it would be very weird if so.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
21. I would think mid-air refueling tankers are closely watched to avoid this very situation.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:41 PM
15 hrs ago

Prairie Gates

(7,957 posts)
32. Pic downthread would seem to confirm that both the crashed aircraft and the safely landed one
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:25 PM
13 hrs ago

were both KC-135s.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
35. Why would that happen?
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:49 PM
12 hrs ago

It's not pilot error, IMHO. Whatever audiotapes are available, probably won't get released. So we will never know what transpired. Have our comms been compromised?

All I can say is....Trump/Putin/Xi are all in on world domination, Where the fuck is 007?

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
11. Unlikely...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 07:21 PM
17 hrs ago

All metal parts involved in fuel handling is either brass or aluminum because of the issue of sparks, this is true of ground transport as well as aircraft. Probably stricter requirements for aircraft since AVgas is so volatile.

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
22. It's a reasonable one but...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:41 PM
15 hrs ago

Having been in the petroleum transport business for a short spell, I can attest that it is fact. Aluminum dust is nasty stuff but you can't get it to spark if all it touches it aluminum or brass. Same with brass.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
37. True story....worked at a gas bottling plant in Portland, Maine for 8 months, We bottled from bulk,.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:58 PM
12 hrs ago

I was a sales prospect that didn't pan out. Mutual agreement, actually.

RoseTrellis

(160 posts)
47. Not avgas
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 08:50 AM
3 hrs ago

Tankers don’t carry avgas.
Also, sometime in the 90s, the airforce transitioned from JP-4 to JP-8, which is even less flammable and volatile.

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
55. That was after my time...
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:46 AM
38 min ago

So thanks for the correction. AVgas was some nasty shit, I hated dealing with it.

Hassin Bin Sober

(27,451 posts)
33. I remember when one blew up over Illinois in 1982
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:41 PM
12 hrs ago

Our neighbor’s kid was in the refueling unit but not on the plane.

Prairie Gates

(7,957 posts)
7. I'm going to call this one: add three to the KIA tally
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 06:50 PM
17 hrs ago

On edit: there's a three-person crew for this aircraft, not six.

mn9driver

(4,846 posts)
15. No ejection seats on this aircraft.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:05 PM
16 hrs ago

If this was a crash, the crew almost certainly perished.

It sounds like two KC135’s and two fighter aircraft were performing aerial refueling when some sort of collision occurred resulting in damage, with the loss of one of the 135’s. It doesn’t seem like this was due to hostile action, but we shall see…

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
17. Given the danger of this flight requirement....seems like ejection seats for the pilots and the
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:13 PM
16 hrs ago

Last edited Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:11 PM - Edit history (1)

refueler specialist is a no-brainer.

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
23. Might be a side door...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:44 PM
15 hrs ago

They might have used, like you see jumpers exit on teevee.

Or not.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
26. Pretty doubtful. Once they are locked into their seat, given their situation...not a lot of time to figure a quick exit
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:07 PM
15 hrs ago

in a catastrophic event hence......ejection seat systems. Logically, that should have been part of the redesign mods to make the frame into a tanker.

2naSalit

(102,149 posts)
27. Hmm...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:13 PM
15 hrs ago

I've never been on one of these so I couldn't say, they're pretty big so I can't really think of a quick exit location. But you're right, there should have been some way for them to exit.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
29. Let's say you lose a wing or tail at 35,000 ft, flying at 450mph..
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:29 PM
14 hrs ago

You aren't exiting your seat., normally.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
38. So, help me understand. Fighter pilots need ejection support,,,,but tanker pilots don't?
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:32 AM
11 hrs ago

Thinking about this....for the 1st time. really....KC-135 crews are kinda fucked. Pilots got to fly and navigate, refueler refuels. Not a whole lot of EW awareness, And no chance if you get a hypersonic missile locked on.

vanessa_ca

(870 posts)
39. That's my logical understanding, but I can't add anything
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:35 AM
11 hrs ago

because I know little about military stuff.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
41. While I am a pilot....
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 01:45 AM
10 hrs ago

With 17whole hours in the left seat on a Cessna 172, I am clueless as well.

RoseTrellis

(160 posts)
48. Not just tankers.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 08:52 AM
3 hrs ago

Only fighters and fighter trainers and bombers have ejection seats.
Transport planes and tankers have never been designed to have ejection seats.

DetroitLegalBeagle

(2,497 posts)
53. mission scope is different, and structure wise its very different
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 10:26 AM
1 hr ago

Fighters and bombers are expected to have to spend a lot of time in contested airspace and operate under conditions where any emergency turns catastrophic basically instantly. Cargo planes and tankers rarely fly in contested airspace and if they do, they usually are under escort. For their normal missions, emergencies aren't usually catastrophic immediately, they are usually emergencies that happen over minutes and allow them to try to handle it while still in the air. The actual plane designs themselves is the other issue.Cargo planes can have multiple decks with personnel on each. Some have crew moving around a lot. They would need a different escape method. Having a single one, like simply bailing out, simplifies things. Ejection seats means the entire structure needs to be designed around it, its not something that can easily be retrofitted into existing designs. And the weight of the systems is the other issue, which is kind of important for cargo and tankers. Every pound of weight tied to ejection systems is less cargo and fuel they can carry every trip. And for planes that are expected to have a very low need for such systems, the trade off isnt worth it. Everything with the military has compromises between efficiency, safety, mission effectiveness, and cost. And mission effectiveness usually takes priority.

Marcuse

(8,964 posts)
19. The Epstein Administration will be claiming the media is trying to make it look bad.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:31 PM
15 hrs ago

At least the cartoon president doffed his red hat.

Maninacan

(269 posts)
28. Fatigue
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:16 PM
15 hrs ago

Apparently can have 1 crew to monitor fatigue , I don't know how that is done in flight.

Prairie Gates

(7,957 posts)
31. Mid-air collision between two KC-135s is the claim from CENTCOM, then
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:24 PM
13 hrs ago

Curiouser and curiouser.

vanessa_ca

(870 posts)
34. I know
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:48 PM
12 hrs ago

And then there's the missing or "lost" one which is curious too. There are pics of a KC-135 multiple sources claim the Islamic Resistance of Iraq’s air defense system shot down, but who knows. They're claiming they shot it down with a P-358 surface-to-air missile.


Some are speculating that the Iraqi resistance may have used surface-to-air missiles against the aircraft operating in western Iraq, forcing them to perform evasive maneuvers, which could be the cause of the alleged accident. That seems plausible to me.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,035 posts)
42. Tankers do not collide on mission. They are totally controlled by AWACs on theater,
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 01:51 AM
10 hrs ago

So what really happened?

riversedge

(80,559 posts)
40. The Stratotanker, however, does not have ejection seats. CENTCOM said "rescue efforts are ongoing."
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 01:31 AM
10 hrs ago



......... The Stratotanker, however, does not have ejection seats. CENTCOM said “rescue efforts are ongoing.”
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»KC-135 tanker involved in...