Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
KC-X Tanker Competition Canceled!  
User currently offlineObserver From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 78 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12778 times:

Breaking news: the Bush Administration has canceled the tanker competition.
http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/tanker-canceled-wsj/

240 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2729 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12741 times:




View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineBeaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12708 times:

..I was very blue-eyed believing EADS/Northrop ever had any chance in bringing that deal home..

 Yeah sure



Please respect animals - don't eat them...
User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12695 times:

Calling AMARC, get those E models to Witchita for new engines and where they a parked throughout the states Preflight and get the crews requalified.


I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4315 posts, RR: 28
Reply 4, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12678 times:



Quote:
Pentagon cancelled the latest round of bidding between the Boeing Co. and the Northrop Grumman Corp. for the 179 planes. It now plans to hold a new competition next year.

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2008/09/08/daily21.html

I don't think it's such a big surprise. There's no way they could've held the competition under such tight timelines and NOT expected to be criticized by the losing side and their supporters for whatever choice they made. Not to mention the ripe appellate field they would have opened up for lots of pickings.



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineGsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12657 times:

If the Congress doesn't force the issue now (and I am sure it will not) no member can claim the troops come first.

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16819 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12656 times:

Just split the deal, 100 for Boeing and 100 for Northrop.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8864 posts, RR: 75
Reply 7, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12615 times:

Guess Boeing got exactly what it wanted.

Better get a new set of glasses, another RFP to read.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineMoose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2298 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12598 times:



Quoting STT757 (Reply 7):
Just split the deal, 100 for Boeing and 100 for Northrop.

Given the added costs of training and supporting two different airframes, you would end up with something like 50 each.



KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
User currently offlineTropicBird From United States of America, joined May 2005, 502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12588 times:

Just what the new RFP will specify is now the big question. I suspect that will depend on what congress says along with the next president. Boeing will now lobby harder to keep the extra fuel credit language out of the RFP so the "right size" 767 can prevail. But keep in mind there are also at least one or two air-mobility type studies in the works and those will also likely shape the next RFP. If those lean to more airlift needs, then a larger aircraft may be sought.

User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4315 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12578 times:



Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
Guess Boeing got exactly what it wanted.

In business, it's not always the best that wins; only the shrewdest.  Wink



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12339 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12539 times:



Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 4):
Calling AMARC, get those E models to Witchita for new engines and where they a parked throughout the states Preflight and get the crews requalified.

Makes sense to me, as long as it's done on a fixed-price contract.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 5):

http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2008/09/08/daily21.html

It also says:

Quote:
“They’re basically scrapping it,” says Sam Sackett, a spokesman for Congressman Todd Tiahrt. “The congressman had requested more time and that’s exactly what’s happening. They apparently acknowledged serious problems in the manner that they tried to force a French tanker on the Air Force.

 Yeah sure

Maybe we should wait for a new Congress!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8864 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12541 times:



Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 11):
In business, it's not always the best that wins; only the shrewdest

With more delays to the Italian tankers, Wedgetail, the 787, and 748F/i and a strike predicted to last for over 8 weeks, asking for more time can stitch you up as well.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineDragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 12507 times:

When did it become so hard to buy some freakin airplanes. The whole process needs revamped, because it sucks ass.


Phrogs Phorever
User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12426 times:

And by the way, Boeing is complaining at the WTO against state aids...


Never trust the obvious
User currently offlineAviationAddict From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 606 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12408 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 4):
Calling AMARC, get those E models to Witchita for new engines and where they a parked throughout the states Preflight and get the crews requalified.

The 135s that are in service now are more than addequately meet the demands of the armed forces; they aren't going to need to add capacity anytime soon. Futhermore, these birds have been flying for 50+ years, this delay isn't going to make any real difference in the long run.


User currently offlineTropicBird From United States of America, joined May 2005, 502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12406 times:



Quoting Dragon6172 (Reply 14):
When did it become so hard to buy some freakin airplanes. The whole process needs revamped, because it sucks ass.

This program is a victim of a much bigger problem facing the United States. That of the outsourcing of jobs and the manipulation of the entire legislative process by special interest groups. When you have those groups fighting each other as they have done on this program, you get this outcome.

What I find most surprising here is why did they even allow EADS to participate considering that in many congressional minds, a European (foreign) aircraft was unacceptable. So unless another American company has a commercial aircraft platform ready to go (which they don't) it will have to go to Boeing by default. So this entire process was truly a waste of time and money. NG/EADS would be fools to try again, they will ultimately lose (again).


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4315 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12350 times:



Quoting Dragon6172 (Reply 14):
When did it become so hard to buy some freakin airplanes.

When the USAF took its eye off of the ball in combination with too much political influence and peddling.



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12323 times:



Quoting TropicBird (Reply 17):
NG/EADS would be fools to try again, they will ultimately lose

At least they make sure Boeing get too much money military contracts. For only that reason, it's worth to compete.



Never trust the obvious
User currently offlineSpeedBirdA380 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2008, 539 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12327 times:



Quoting TropicBird (Reply 17):
What I find most surprising here is why did they even allow EADS to participate considering that in many congressional minds, a European (foreign) aircraft was unacceptable.

I agree. Even If the best tanker for the job is the EAD'S/NG tanker, due to politic's I dont think the US Airforce will be "allowed to buy it".


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4315 posts, RR: 28
Reply 20, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12280 times:



Quoting Aither (Reply 19):
At least they make sure Boeing get too much money military contracts. For only that reason, it's worth to compete.

I think it would be worth it to compete because if Boeing pitches the KC-777, NG/EADS can now pitch the 330F airframe. Maybe even throw in a little GEnX action while they're at it. There's no way the USAF will be able to field the new KC-X on their originally planned time line so both suppliers can now pitch their latest and best offering available.



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineGsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12253 times:



Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 21):
I think it would be worth it to compete because if Boeing pitches the KC-777, NG/EADS can now pitch the 330F airframe. Maybe even throw in a little GEnX action while they're at it. There's no way the USAF will be able to field the new KC-X on their originally planned time line so both suppliers can now pitch their latest and best offering available.

Unfortunately that isn't how it will work. Boeing will roll out the -200AT and say that is it.

The issue here is not the tanker, but keeping an EADS production line out of the United States. Now that they have done that, they will say the -200AT is what the Air Force wants (doesn't matter what the Air Force says).

Big gamble and a lot of money now to the Obama campaign. If McCain wins, it will be interesting.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8188 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12241 times:



Quoting Gsosbee (Reply 6):
If the Congress doesn't force the issue now (and I am sure it will not) no member can claim the troops come first.

When talking about the troops coming first you need to look at various things like length of troop deployments and time at home between deployments, benefits like the GI Bill, taking care of vets long term and how hard the administration has fought giving Agent Orange compensation to deep water sailors exposed and having the identified conditions, etc. Then look at the suicide rate, the increase of officers and enlisted personnel who were considered career now leaving the service. Throw in the abnormally high percentage of troops in Iraq who are on anti-depressants and other meds and you have a pretty good outline of what is needed for the troops to come first.

In reality, the tanker is pretty far down the list when it comes to putting the troops first. Taking care of the troops means that if the bloody B-52s can still fly then the bloody KC-135s can still fly.


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8864 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12215 times:

NG statement on the cancellation :

http://www.irconnect.com/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=150075

Quote:
"Northrop Grumman entered this competition in good faith and proposed the most modern, most capable tanker available, at the best value to the American taxpayer. While we understand the complexities of this procurement, we are greatly concerned about the potential future implications for the defense acquisition process."

Boeing has no statement at this stage, either it is late, or it is being developed in Japanese or Italian. Possibly the people who write them are out on strike. Rumours are about they want 6 months to come up with a statement to cope with the change.  sarcastic 

 duck 



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8403 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12190 times:

This is funny. At least we didn't spend a whole lot of money for nothing.

On the bright side, doing this will get us higher technology equipment.

On the minus side, this will make it (theoretically) weaker to fight WW-III for a certain amount of time. But I am sure this doesn't trouble Lord Boeing at all, who has essentially dictated that USAF not employ new tankers for now. All hail the powerful wise ones, our Boeing lords.


25 Post contains links Lumberton : http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN1043288320080910
26 Revelation : So, what will we talk about now?
27 Zeke : Nothing was on the Boeing site, or the IDS site, they now have made a comment on their tanker blog. Still not the same as a formal statement, or a pr
28 Moo : Oh for goodness sake, stfu about the 'taxpayer' or the 'warfighter' - neither of you give two hoots about either, the only thing you *are* interested
29 Sxf24 : Boeing released an official statement hours ago.
30 Gsosbee : The US Court in New York controls the Agent Orange issue and has consistently held that as soon as verifiable evidence is presented to the court, the
31 United787 : What a disaster this whole thing has been...as an American, I am embarrased... Yet another failing of the Bush administration...
32 EPA001 : Well this unbelievable news shows how much pull the Boeing fan boys in congress really have. NG is no small company, but I seriously doubt that NG ha
33 Astuteman : Like shrewdness had anything at all to do with this........ Cos that would be a really, really bad thing, wouldn't it? I really, really wouldn't bet
34 Seefivein : Gsosbee -- Wrong. Unless Congress specifies no single source, Boeing will be the only company bidding as NG can read the writing on the wall. Boeing w
35 Post contains links Seefivein : also http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...05E-B161-40E1-BE44-302464D54878%7D
36 MD11Engineer : Exactly. Boeing fears an Airbus factory in the US, because it would make Airbus more independent of the fluctuations of the US dollar. The military c
37 ChrisNH : Three cheers for that great 'Global Economy' that seemed like 'such a swell idea at the time.' I am appalled at the hypocrisy of people who puff out t
38 RedFlyer : If the new RFP, whenever it comes out, stipulates an advantage for carrying more fuel I seriously doubt Boeing will pitch the 200AT. I hate to say th
39 Ken777 : Currencies are like pendulums and they can always swing back. Airbus sure didn't suffer when the Euro was under 90 cents. Personally I believe that i
40 TropicBird : So true -- it was scripted -- by Boeing and some former leaders in the Air Force. It then went off script when the new leadership in the DOD got invo
41 EPA001 : If the USAF, after so many years, still does not know what it wants, they better stop operations. They now do know what they want, they selected thei
42 RedFlyer : You make a comment like that, and then you say... The GAO did not view the mistakes as "minor". Had the mistakes been minor the award would not have
43 Flighty : So that means we should lose wars? God forbid the US military doesn't win the paperwork championship. I guess we should just have lawyers and no Pent
44 Post contains links RedFlyer : Valid points you raise. But then I should ask: why bother to have an RFP in the first place? Just sole-source the award. What's the point of having a
45 EPA001 : @ Red Flyer: the whole procedure took several years, included thousands and thousands of pages, almost uncountable meetings with Boeing, and later als
46 Revelation : You mean the USAF? One must agree that if the USAF made zero errors, the KC-45A would be on its way to being funded in the next budget. And people ke
47 Gsosbee : Nope. Congress (with their masterful 17% approval rating) would have never funded the NG airplane. That is the "politically charged" part of Gates' c
48 Bennett123 : They had better hope that the KC135E's are in good condition. IMO this competition will not re start any time soon.
49 Lumberton : What makes you so certain it will be a competition, or that a new RFP will be issued? The USAF/DOD, especially when staffed by new political appointe
50 Post contains images A5XX : Is there anyone here who really thought that the outcome of this contract would be different than what it is now? And for those who are afraid of the
51 Dougbr2006 : I wonder if Boeing will actually do anything over the coming months with respect to looking at another airframe than the 767-200 or will they want ano
52 Post contains images Gsosbee : Boeing is now considering this as their contract. Doesn't matter what the new RFP says, they will roll out the -200AT as the airplane the Air Force i
53 Revelation : I said it'd be on its way to be funded, not that it'd be funded. But the currently stalled contract for 4 development frames would have been in effec
54 Revelation : What makes you think they are dilapidated? They have low hours/cycles and good maintenance. Probably a lot, but a lot less than if there was an all-n
55 Par13del : Well if there are any loosers on this one it is the Bush administration, my opinion is that they have been using the Military Industrial Complex to pu
56 Lumberton : True. They just announced a deal in Tunisia to produce "components". However, moving an entire line outside Europe might be a bit too much to bite of
57 RedFlyer : Gsosbee, if you're going to throw around statistics, at least get the numbers right. Congress' approval rating is 11%, not 17%. And on a bid with so
58 Post contains images A5XX : So, what will happen next? Since Boeing has no viable airplane to compete against the current EADS offering, and can't win the competition, the only s
59 EPA001 : I am sorry, but that comparison is way out of proportion. Boeing opted with the GAO protest for a totally new RFP, or a heavily changed one. And for
60 Moose135 : People keep throwing that line around, like it comes out of the EADS talking-points memo. What if Boeing had protested 8 points and all 8 were upheld
61 Sphealey : Which I think tells you far more about human nature than it does about the US Congress. In the US, "Congress" does not stand for a single national el
62 TropicBird : I wonder what EADS will do with the two non-modified KC-30 airframes that have already been built?
63 MD11Engineer : Airbus needs a big foreign order to be able to justify setting up a new production line in another country to the European trade unions. Jan
64 AirRyan : With a single digit approval rating the US taxpayer should be able to fire the entire Congress and tell them not to both coming back from vacation. D
65 Ken777 : I think that the AF knew what it wanted when it originally wrote the RFP, but then they started changing their minds when they started considering th
66 Alien : As an American I am proud of what has happened. All of it from the 2002 tanker lease deal to now. The system worked as it is supposed to. DOD has to
67 NicoEDDF : The most worrying for me so far is the economical impact the whole process had... ...just count all the hours the fellow a.nutters spent on this topic
68 Moo : Given any mildly complicated process, anyone can find a significant number of issues to raise complaints about - its the nature of the beast, there w
69 GDB : EADS would be mad to set up a line in the US, if they really have no chance here. Then they can say, 'look, good old flag waving Boeing are denying a
70 Zeke : The plan was to retire 50 of them this year, according to the USAF, KC-135s have been spending 400 days every 5 years in depot level maintenance. Boe
71 EPA001 : That is exactly what I mean. This enormously complex process was always debatable due to the so many changes over the years. They went from a tailore
72 NicoEDDF : I meant cash of course...
73 MCIGuy : Big difference from what I got:
74 UH60FtRucker : Wow. This is rich. DM must have some incredibly powerful allies in the Bush Administration. Because this news just guaranteed them at least two more
75 Post contains links Moo : I'm betting he has nothing to say with regard to Boeing doing it... http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q1/080214a_nr.html Should be amusing if
76 EBJ1248650 : So why hold a competition? If "Buy American" is the way they want to go, then give Boeing a contract but make darn sure Boeing doesn't milk it for al
77 Col : What an absolute joke and waste of tax payers money - normal day for us unfortunately!!!! This is the best and most factual line I have read in this w
78 Imapilotaz : OK, this is going to sound bad, but I sure hope the non-Americans (ie, those that arent paying taxes to the US Gov't) just shut the heck up and not po
79 Venus6971 : Everybody stop panicking , the KC-135 is old but is still in better shape than any commercial acft of equal age if any exist or still being used. Its
80 NicoEDDF : Then I surely hope you love as well to spend USD on Japanese Aircraft Components that employ Japanese employers. Otherwise you gonna get a problem wi
81 Revelation : Everyone should expect our government to live up to its procurement laws and trade treaties. USAF shot itself in the foot by not changing the RFP to
82 Trex8 : then get ready to throw up when the president flies in that Anglo Italian chopper from the White House to Andrews! If they replaced AF1 with a 787 wh
83 Imapilotaz : That's a pretty stupid assumption. I never said that was the only thing I am proud of. But you damn well believe I am proud to see a 747 as the symbo
84 Post contains links Seefivein : put boeing where it says OCCUPATION / EMPLOYER of donor seems more D's than R's http://www.opensecrets.org
85 GDB : The only problem with the logic of important defence equipment being from the US, is that right now, the 'warfighters' are using Belgium light and med
86 Col : Can you ask this 747 if we can say Merry Christmas this year. The Bad Human Rights Chinese can, yet we are supposed to be free, but have to say Happy
87 Post contains links Revelation : Some good articles from Seattle's papers today: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...echnology/2008172221_tanker11.html http://blog.seattlepi.nwsour
88 Par13del : Why, no one seemd to have a problem with Boeing loosing the contract, thus closing down its B-767 line while Airbus got more jobs for its workers in
89 Revelation : Yes, and in WWII we were fond of Bofors and Oerlikon AA guns too. I don't think you'll agree, but I'll offer up Galileo (European GPS) as one counter
90 Flighty : Yes. Exactly. We are not talking about low level decision makers here, this is the USAF brass at the highest level. They made an honest call that was
91 MSYtristar : I guess NG can take down the billboard on I-65 just North of Mobile with a huge picture of the KC-45 on it surrounded by stars and stripes.
92 NicoEDDF : Please please please, I don't want to offend you. But stay reasonable. There is nothing like representing freedom and power by any american aircraft.
93 Astuteman : So it would appear..... And likely to remain so for a long time, by the looks of things This thread was worth reading after all..... say what? Anythi
94 Bennett123 : Imapilotaz Are you saying that you spend your money on imports, but when your govt spends YOUR money that it should only buy US, (incidentally what is
95 Post contains links Bennett123 : Revelation This may be of interest http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/ames/ames.htm
96 Sprout5199 : Well they are US built by MDD( Boeing now). Dan in Jupiter
97 NicoEDDF : Are they? Didn't know
98 Flighty : Okay guys I hope to only give you my best. You guys are my pals after all. So here it is.. The USAF tanker of the future.... The Boeing / Eads KC-30,
99 Revelation : I agree there was no criminal intent. But it's just as important for them to be able to write down what requirements they have for an airplane correc
100 Par13del : Taking another look at the whole issue. 1. The US Air Force initial RFP was for an a/c which only Boeing could fill with an off the shelf offering. 2.
101 Post contains images Skytaxi : You mean the B330. [Edited 2008-09-11 14:57:11]
102 Bennett123 : Revelation. How long ago was Fuchs, I know that it was far longer ago than Ames. Perhaps you need to look at your enemies closer to home, rather than
103 Revelation : This is where the USAF screwed things up. Apparently they did not make it clear that extra credit was being given for extra tankerage, at least not i
104 Par13del : Thus my comment about fitting a square peg into a round hole. The Air Force has two tankers, one they can classify as strategic the other as tactical
105 Post contains links and images Flighty : View Large View MediumPhoto © Paul Robbins - Nashville Aviation Photographers = View Large View MediumPhoto © Jose Mendez - PR Planespotter
106 AirRyan : Wow, so basically your Congressman is opposed to competition and is willing to pay more for less. That's great if it turns out to be correct; it's ab
107 Dl767captain : Wait i'm confused, does this mean that there will be no new tanker for the USAF?
108 Revelation : Basically, as of right now, yes. The existing competition has been cancelled. It's now up to the next administration's Department of Defense what to
109 EPA001 : This could very well be true. Giving Boeing a (long) shot at trying to develop a B787-based tanker which could outperform the NG-EADS proposed A330-M
110 Scbriml : Isn't that a bit of a circular argument? IIRC, Boeing had no issue with the RFP until after they lost the contest.
111 EPA001 : That is very true. That is also why their behaviour after losing the contest has been what we have seen, and that makes not a nice picture. But is ha
112 SpeedBirdA380 : Could someone please confirm a simple fact for me because I am confused by this mess! I just read an article in the Seattle Time's that - "The Air For
113 EPA001 : As far as I know nobody told Boeing or NG-EADS that. The RFP clearly specified minimum requirements (based on the KC-135?) and that extra credits woul
114 Flighty : It's just silly to suggest Boeing did not know that more capabilities make it a better aircraft, all else equal. It's like it all depends on what the
115 SpeedBirdA380 : But I thought this was the major argument for Boeing and it's supporter's. That the Airforce did not tell Boeing that extra credit's would be given f
116 EPA001 : If the USAF had handed out different RFP's it would be a criminal act of misleading in an industrial procurement process. This would almost certainly
117 Ken777 : Go back to the fact that this was Boeing's first protest in 30 years. That says more about the credibility of the protest than anything the AF could
118 EPA001 : That says nothing. How many tanker contracts were awarded by the USAF over the last 30 years?
119 Gsosbee : This whole deal makes no sense. Maybe in 10 or 15 years after the first new tanker is delivered, someone at Boeing and/or the Air Force/DoD will write
120 RedFlyer : C'mon, people. Grow up. This is all about a procurement process that went off the tracks. Hate Boeing all you want; puff up EADS/Airbus' 'superior' p
121 EPA001 : You are correct that it was breached, otherwise there would not have been such a ruling by the GAO. But now the RFP is fixed, (in the end it did not
122 Francoflier : The problem is that since both companies entered products that were quite sensibly different from each other and not really competing on a level play
123 RedFlyer : Thank you for saying that, EPA001! I enjoy reading your posts and that comment restored my confidence in your integrity. And you are ABSOLUTELY right
124 RedFlyer : Valid argument, but not quite on point in this instance. If that is all there was to it, there would be no cause for an appeal or adverse ruling. The
125 Post contains links Revelation : Cheers! I agree. It's pretty clear that Boeing has been confused about size all along. Here's one quote right from the begining of this RFP showing t
126 SpeedBirdA380 : If Boeing was confused about what size tanker the AF wanted why did they not just pick up the phone and ask the AF to clarify or as you say demanded
127 Post contains images SpeedBirdA380 :    I think this is far more likely.[Edited 2008-09-12 10:47:20]
128 GDB : Well Revelation, Gallileo could be seen as part of a general ESA ramping up of space activities, beyond comsats etc, which also includes the Jules Ver
129 Astuteman : Complacency I suspect. I mean, what chance does a product with an Airbus content stand? Rgds
130 Ken777 : Actually the question should be "how many large military competitions did Boeing lose over the past 30 years without filing a complaint?" When you lo
131 Par13del : Key to the entire problem, square peg, round hole. Well they started the whole RFP modification when the told the Pentagon that if the RFP was not mo
132 EPA001 : It is off topic, but thanks very much Red Flyer and Revelation. Although maybe we do not always agree on some topics, the respect for fellow A-netter
133 Post contains links TropicBird : The aircraft size issue was first brought up in late 2006 by a small company wanting to compete. http://www.leeham.net/filelib/ScottsColumn060208_A.p
134 Post contains links Agill : http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/09/12/direct-sale-of-tanker-to-dod/ I don't think this has been posted yet?
135 SpeedBirdA380 : I watched the video but had to turn it off after Norm Dick's started calling the A330 a "great big monster taking up runway space"! I suppose by his
136 EPA001 : No, it has not as far as I known it. On topic: a direct sale of 20 tankers to the USAF without funding approved by congress is highly unlikely imho.
137 RedFlyer : From the article you posted: [emphasis added] How could they bypass the RFP process? Congress would have to approve the funding and they are not goin
138 Par13del : If the Air Force goes for this Boeing should re-submit their original lease to buy deal for 100 tankers, then the warfighters would have 120 new tank
139 DL767captain : Well i guess that would give both boeing and airbus to come up with another offer, maybe take some more improvements from the 787 and A350 and work t
140 Ken777 : Not a problem for me - I understand that there are a lot of emotions regarding the entire tanker SNAFU over the years. I not that emotional on who wi
141 RedFlyer : I feel the same way. I've come around to believing that the USAF does in fact want a bigger tanker, and for good reason. Not least of which is a desi
142 TropicBird : They couldn't because Boeing wanted to lease/sell the KC-767...no matter what. Boeing & the USAF have been working on this with some in Congress sinc
143 Francoflier : My point exactly. Had the RFP called for a bigger aircraft, Boeing would pretty much have been screwed as a tanker development of the 777 would proba
144 Post contains links Zeke : It was actually the GAO that told the USAF to change the RFP. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07367r.pdf This is a common misconception regarding the R
145 EPA001 : Thanks Zeke for this clarification. I interpreted things indeed a little different, but your post makes it absolutely clear how the interpretation sh
146 Beaucaire : The latest-following "der Spiegel" ,are considerations by EADS to quite the bidding.. EADS management does not think they will find fair conditions ou
147 Post contains links SpeedBirdA380 : Obama attacks McCain on Boeing deal, trade issues. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1240680320080912
148 Par13del : Only problem with this is that the same GAO who advised the US Air Force to modify the original RFP to allow NG to compete is also the body who uphel
149 AirRyan : NoBama's an idiot trying to spin the KC-X into a political topic, especially one in which it only makes McCain look better! I swear, these bleeding h
150 Ken777 : And should the new specs become obviously too much geared to Airbus's likes, the answer from Boeing will be - stick it up . . .
151 Flighty : That's really daft of Obama to do. Alerting law enforcement officials to Boeing's and USAF's crimes in the 2003 tanker scandal was one of McCain's pr
152 Post contains links RedFlyer : Here's the Reuter's link for the article in English: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSLD32528920080913 I think we can all stop with the "Bo
153 Post contains links and images Zeke : I am not "blaming" any party. Any vendor has every right to protest legitimate points of the process. What I don't like is what I see to be an abuse
154 Gsosbee : A couple of comments. NG (through no issues on their part) could not complete the deal when they had the clear winner, so how can they expect to win
155 Flighty : This is a good point; then again, the A340-500 HGW may also be a viable "uber-tanker." Both it and the 777 are fantastically capable aircraft; it dep
156 RedFlyer : A valid concern, but given that this was Boeing's first protest in over 30 years I think it says a lot about Boeing's belief that their concerns were
157 Post contains links RedFlyer : It appears EADS is now denying the report in Der Spiegel. http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssI...UtilitiesNews/idUSLD39386320080913
158 Post contains links Zeke : I doubt the A340-500 or 777 will get a look in, they would add about 9 billion to the purchase price alone, not to mention the development and life c
159 Revelation : Just want to first say that there's no way to keep score on such things, IMHO. I was trying to point out that while both sides preech fairness, both s
160 Revelation : The Japanese already own the only 767-based AWACS platforms in the world. The losse of a nayle, the losse of an army. The want of a nayle looseth the
161 GDB : Revelation, BAE has not found to have acted improperly with the Saudi's despite an extensive investigation and a long media running media campaign, th
162 Post contains links TropicBird : One of Obama's advisers on defense issues is Rudy de Leon, Boeing's former VP of Government Affairs in DC and a key figure in the tanker scandal. How
163 Revelation : So, maybe I'm being dense here, but is your point that the UK is pure as the driven snow, and the US is lower than whale dung? Or what exactly is you
164 Alien : Baloney, the UK government capitulated to Saudi demands that they drop the probe long before it was completed. We will never know if there was no wro
165 Astuteman : Make your mind up....... I'd love to know how a business could expect to execute a programme of that complexity without some local expertise..... Rgd
166 GDB : Not at all, I'm only reacting to, from some US politicians and commentators, the self righteousness, the outright lies, the sheer hyprocracy. I'd als
167 Flighty : Agreed 100%. There are a bunch of ex-frat boys who run our security programs on the corporate / lobbyist side. I am connected to some of them. Lots o
168 RedFlyer : Be careful what you quote. This is the same Air Force that also said the RFP was the most transparent and fair competition ever held. And we know whe
169 Par13del : Politics all over again, how can a a/c be inferior when it exceeds the RFP set up by the Air Force, the B-767 whichever version exceeds the perfprman
170 TropicBird : I would agree with that sentiment. From my personal experiences, a lot of people in DC ( in media, politicians and lobbyists) are indeed contemptuous
171 RedFlyer : Don't forget to throw the USAF leadership under the same bus while you're at it. Had the GAO not ruled in Boeing's favor back in June and upheld the
172 Moose135 : You might want to add that NG/EADS's current leaders have absolutely no care for whats best for the warfighter and taxpayer on the KC-X program which
173 TropicBird : Maybe so - but I have seen more evidence of Boeing's arrogance dating back to before the first tanker scandal. You are dead on.
174 Alien : What part did I get wrong GDB? The UK government was pressured into dropping the probe by Saudi Arabia. Everything else you bring up is nothing more
175 Post contains images Zeke : I have no evidence to suggest that it was not, considering the size of the RFP documents, thousands of pages, over 37 files, the number of issues ide
176 Revelation : Because without the European tanker in the game, the US vendor could charge pretty much what they want to charge. At least with the EU tanker around,
177 RedFlyer : Huh? Come again, please.
178 Gsosbee : Same reply as on the other thread - the time and economic hurdles are to high. Do you have any idea how much it costs to design and build an airplane
179 Revelation : Seems we are doing this for F-22, F-35 et al. Do we need to do this for every program? Wouldn't tankers be a good area for participation from other c
180 TropicBird : After all that has transpired in this program with people going to prison and promises of a fair and transparent process -- not getting the point IS
181 GDB : Alien, yes the Saudi's did exert pressure, and what a political shit-storm it created! (Making the small army of journo's looking into this, even more
182 Post contains links RedFlyer : Well, looks like we might all be in for a long period of endless - and endlessly long - discussions on the tanker wars: http://www.reuters.com/article
183 RedFlyer : I wasn't able to edit this post so I'll just add it here. Among other things the USAF has indicated and which were reported in this article is the po
184 Revelation : Thanks for the link. And congress-proofing. I'm sure whatever happens, USAF will have a good "sense of Congress" before they announce a winner. Stop t
185 Zeke : Can you think of another large RFP that was so open ? The public knew so much about the workings of this RFP, the FBO site had most of the minutes fr
186 Post contains links TropicBird : USAF spent over $116 million on this latest aborted procurement. Air Force Magazine Daily Report Tuesday September 16, 2008 What Starting Over Costs:
187 RedFlyer : I don't know. I'm not in the business of reviewing government RFPs. But if you want me to agree with you that this was the most open RFP ever, well,
188 Post contains links Alien : How can you make such such a blatantly false statement when the GAO and the DOD both clearly said, and wrote otherwise. The evidence has presented cl
189 Gsosbee : You obviously have no clue what is involved and what would be at risk. This would be an economic non-starter.
190 A5XX : An interesting idea for Boeing, I think, would be to submit a shortened variant of the B777, the KC777SP. A KC777 less a ring or two. Could be a viabl
191 Alien : You have a hard time with math. I can tell. Lets run through the numbers shall we. 8 Billion to develop the winning aircraft. Add to that another 3 o
192 Rheinwaldner : Today passenger aircraft suit so well as tanker platform that this idea is inappropriate. Instead of this you just could transfer the money to arbitr
193 Zeke : I don't follow that analogy. Where are the NASA design errors in the KC-X procurement process ? Have they ? I have not seen a single statement from e
194 RedFlyer : You don't understand that? Really? Amazing.
195 Gsosbee : Alien, Get real or buy a bank and fund this yourself. Why do you think LM got out of the large airplane business? The Global economy/industrial base w
196 Ken777 : There is no money to fund tanker R&D these days. Actually, the AF will be lucky to get some funding for the KC-X program as it stands. Take a look at
197 GDB : Alien, wrong again, the concern was about the Saudi pressure, that is distinct from the substance of the allegations, though I don't doubt you've some
198 Moo : Show me one single large aircraft that has cost a mere $8billion to develop. The Boeing 787 cost more than $10billion, before you add the cost of the
199 Post contains links Gsosbee : John Young has some interesting comments in the following article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2008/09/17/AR2008091702857.html This stat
200 Ken777 : Lawyers tend to throw in everything, including the kitchen sink, when preparing a document like that. If the shoe had been on the other foot then the
201 Flighty : ?? you could say that about almost every US government aircraft. But the fact is we are a huge, rich country and we do need new jets sometimes (like
202 Ken777 : While this may be the time that the AF wants a new tanker it still has to compete with other projects for tax dollars and that is the challenge. Ther
203 Tugger : I saw that article, the part that raised my eyebrows was this: I haven't read through this entire thread so maybe this is old news but I hadn't seen
204 GDB : If the KC-X is vital, of the USAF is under budgetary strain, axe plans for this all new '2018 bomber'. (If the requirement is still there, how about F
205 Ken777 : "The Pentagon's top weapons buyer said the proposed aerial refueling tankers from both Northrop Grumman and Boeing were "technically outstanding" but
206 Post contains images A5XX : We all thought the USAF was looking to select and buy the best available tanker for the USAF needs... And also at a lower cost than Boeing's KC-767?
207 Ken777 : While the generals would love to believe it, the AF doesn't need a Cadillac when a Ford will do the job. Again, what is the total cost over the time
208 Post contains links Gsosbee : Looks like NG will get something for their work: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...rthrop19-2008sep19,0,7521700.story With each story a little bi
209 SpeedBirdA380 : Pardon my ignorance but are you more qualified to decide that the USAF " doesn't need a Cadillac when a Ford will do the job" than the USAF General's
210 EPA001 : This remark made in the article is remarkable too: "Boeing spokesman Dan Beck declined to comment on Young's remarks but said the company "is looking
211 Dk1967 : I suspect the interim period will be longer than you anticipate, and that by the time the AF gets another bite at this, the airframes that will be co
212 Ken777 : I'n not qualified to make the selection between the two bids, but I am able to read. Recently I've been reading about the meltdown of the financial s
213 Post contains links TropicBird : In the RAND AoA for the KC-X program, they stated that "used" aircraft should be considered. The USAF said "no" they wanted "new" and that was ok then
214 Post contains links RedFlyer : Hi EPA001! I have a question about this comment. Was there something specific about the KC-767's technology base that rendered it inferior with regar
215 SpeedBirdA380 : Or maybe the USAF decided on it's own that it wanted a bigger plane? Even If they did convince the USAF of the merit's of a bigger plane what is wron
216 Ken777 : Or maybe a lowball starting bid, knowing that cost overruns will cover the difference. How's Marine One doing on cost overruns? Might be a good examp
217 Post contains links AirRyan : I for one am adamently opposed to the decision to cancel the award to NG and I call for the resignation of the entire Democrat party of the U.S. house
218 WarRI1 : I think that after the Air Force screwed this competition up so badly that it was shot down and canceled that damages to NG be paid out of their oper
219 Ken777 : It wasn't that long ago that the only Medal of Honor awardee in Congress was a Democratic Senator who left a leg in Vietnam. And there was a Democrat
220 EPA001 : Hi RedFlyer. As you know developments in the aviation world are going faster and faster every year. Design of new plains is mainly done by computer t
221 Revelation : This is wrong. The A330 is at least 10 years newer in design, and is more aerodynamically efficient. Part of that does come from being larger. In par
222 Gsosbee : Only if the manufacturers either have made a substantial dent in the back log or are willing to operate multiple manufacturing lines. There is more m
223 EPA001 : Given the current financial crisis which has to be payed for by the US tax payer, and will take a huge toll on the federal budget for years to come,
224 Ken777 : We're around half a dollars trillion dollars now, with Bush asking for 700 billion, which will probably turn into a billion when all is said and done
225 AirRyan : So many like to say the USAF screwed this one and I disagree - I say politics got the better of this one. Which is why I have remained adamently oppo
226 Curt22 : It's fine if you hate Bush, but foolish if you think anyone believes the Bush administration had anything to do with the Tanker deal...there was no o
227 Ken777 : Which is why McCain plays the POW card every time he gets a chance? Why is he different?
228 WarRI1 : I would have to agree with that point. I have been reading a book by Dick Morris and in chapter six of the book "Fleeced" He covers the ties to EADS/
229 Post contains links TropicBird : I suspect that many of the same cast of characters behind the tanker lease scandal are behind this second failure. If you have the time - this linked
230 Astuteman : Of course, it's possible that Boeing were "overbidding", rather than NG "underbidding". It would have the same effect...... Rgds
231 RedFlyer : There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I tip my hat to their accomplisment. And I've used the tanker saga to educate my sales team on the merit
232 Revelation : Not directly. Given the 767 EIS in 1982 and A330 EIS in 1992, one can presume increase in CFD use for aerodynamics may have something to do with KC-3
233 Post contains links RedFlyer : Apparently so. And that means the USAF went with the best offering. Unfortunately, it may all be for naught if EADS follows through on its threat to
234 Ken777 : From the link: "if those countries that have ordered the plane do not abstain from claiming damages for the delays" I think that is what the threat i
235 WarRI1 : Is this the norm in military procurement for aircraft?, dropping the demands for compensation because of delays in developement and delivery. It seem
236 Revelation : EADS knows it has the governments by the short and curlies. The governments created EADS, they own big percentages of EADS, they created the A400M pr
237 WarRI1 : A little game of hardball by Airbus. I guess it could be costly for those governments. It will be interesting to see what the final costs are per air
238 GDB : I think with the A400M, as it became, you'll find governments were in fact very destructive for many years. By not funding, by that meaning for buying
239 GDB : Though the KC-10 fleet is of course much newer, they are not getting any younger, some will know better than me on this, but is it not the case they a
240 Trex8 : they did not create the A400M to get Airbus in the military business, they created the A400M project then decided that instead of creating a new prod
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic KC-X Tanker Competition Canceled!
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Usaf Invites KC-X Tanker Bidders To The Table posted Wed Nov 21 2007 06:19:13 by Zeke
KC-X Tanker Project Approved posted Sun Jul 9 2006 22:04:24 by 747400sp
Pentagon OKs Tanker Competition posted Fri Apr 14 2006 21:21:35 by RedFlyer
What If The Usaf Needed A Smaller Tanker? KC-767? posted Mon Mar 31 2008 14:36:41 by Jackonicko
Is The KC-10 Tanker Faster Than The Standard DC-10 posted Mon Nov 19 2007 21:14:36 by Blackbird
Senator Calls For Open Competition In KC-X... posted Thu Sep 20 2007 01:02:04 by AirRyan
Cargo / Passenger Capasity Of New Tanker KC-X posted Sat Jul 14 2007 00:17:17 by Keesje
KC-135 Tanker Wing posted Sat Jan 6 2007 01:17:13 by Blackbird
KC-X Air Tanker Information Request posted Tue Dec 12 2006 19:48:06 by TropicBird
Tanker Study Opens Boeing, Airbus Competition posted Sat Jan 28 2006 07:41:17 by Jacobin777
Tanker Study Opens Boeing, Airbus Competition posted Sat Jan 28 2006 07:41:17 by Jacobin777
Cargo / Passenger Capasity Of New Tanker KC-X posted Sat Jul 14 2007 00:17:17 by Keesje
KC-135 Tanker Wing posted Sat Jan 6 2007 01:17:13 by Blackbird
KC-X Air Tanker Information Request posted Tue Dec 12 2006 19:48:06 by TropicBird
Tanker Study Opens Boeing, Airbus Competition posted Sat Jan 28 2006 07:41:17 by Jacobin777

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format