Lawmakers to Keep the KC-135 in Service Until Deficiencies are Resolved

It is well-known that US Air Force bombers and fighters are far ahead of tankers on the technical advancement front… yet lawmakers are holding their stance that now is not the time to do something about it. Congress is pushing to keep the current fleet of KC-135s in service while the KC-46 moves into its place, ditching funding for a true Next-Generation replacement.

The Boeing KC-46 Pegasus has been positioned as the next USAF tanker, despite being riddled with unresolved deficiencies. Though a full fleet replacement seemed possible, Congress has capped acquisitions of the modernized B767 at 183 aircraft until Boeing proves it can fix the jet’s persistent problems. This leaves the Eisenhower-era KC-135 Stratotanker, which refuses to die no matter how many retirement ceremonies are scheduled for it, in charge.

Air Force officials had flaunted the idea of a shiny new Next-Generation Air Refueling System (NGAS), possibly using platforms like JetZero’s blended-wing Z4 demonstrator. But when the fiscal 2026 budget request came out, NGAS was allotted just $12.9 million for studies… for reference, that’s less than what the service spends on its marching bands.

Former Air Mobility Command boss Gen. Mike Minihan called this investment “a big fat insult to the mobility community,” warning that the KC-46 is, at best, a “generation 2.5” tanker serving a fleet of sixth-generation bombers and fighters.

At the same time, the Senate Armed Services Committee is asking to keep KC-135s flying, while the House is targeting a minimum tanker fleet of 504 aircraft by 2027. Even with the potential purchase of up to 75 more KC-46s, the Air Force would only have around 263, which is barely half of its current fleet size.

The service “will consider all requirements needed to sustain the KC-135 fleet until 2050-plus. The Air Force is focused on KC-135 airworthiness and modifications to maintain aircraft availability while adding capability for connectivity, communications and survivability.”

The underlying issue is, of course, money. Former Secretary Frank Kendall admitted last year that the service can’t afford a new tanker, a sixth-gen fighter, and fleets of drones all at once. Unless priorities bend, the Air Force’s aerial refueling capability will remain on life support for the foreseeable future.

FMI: www.af.mil