N49WA
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:06 pm

Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 am

"...Russian state-owned aerospace group United Aircraft Corporation plans to bid for a US Air Force tanker contract, teaming up with a US partner, a lawyer for UAC has said. EADS, the parent of Boeing's Airbus, also said Friday it was considering a bid..."


Full story: http://www.france24.com/en/20100319-...boeing-united-aircraft-corporation

Should be interesting.
If it's new and quiet, I don't want to fly it.
 
T prop
Posts: 912
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:33 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:19 am

Quoting n49wa (Thread starter):
EADS, the parent of Boeing's Airbus

  What??
 
N49WA
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:06 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:24 am

Quoting T prop (Reply 1):
Quoting n49wa (Thread starter):
EADS, the parent of Boeing's Airbus

  What??

Um, yeah, ok. I missed that part when I copied and pasted. Much better article in the Wall Street Journal.

[Edited 2010-03-19 22:25:47]
If it's new and quiet, I don't want to fly it.
 
cosmofly
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:36 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:29 am

This news is making my day. In terms of entertainment, it tops the movie "Up in the air" I watched today.
 
N49WA
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:06 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:37 am

What do you folks think Russia's chances are? Off the top of my head I see 4 engines vs. 2 (767/A330), airworthiness certs, completely new entry to US aviation, etc.
Do you see anything that might work in their favor?
If it's new and quiet, I don't want to fly it.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7716
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:41 am

Quoting n49wa (Reply 4):
What do you folks think Russia's chances are? Off the top of my head I see 4 engines vs. 2 (767/A330), airworthiness certs, completely new entry to US aviation, etc.
Do you see anything that might work in their favor?

The 767 is so old that the Russians could probably match its performance for 1/3 or 1/2 the price. Then, that puts Boeing into a pickle. This is a joke, but the fact it will stack up against Boeing's offer is going to be embarrassing. And the Russians won't be shy about it.
 
cosmofly
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:36 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:43 am

If it meets the requirements and is half the price of A or B, what excuse will DOD have to reject the bid?

Simply playing the game, the Russians will stir the pot enough to get some kind of compensations, directly or even though they will not get deal.

No matter what, the only people having an headache now must be the USAF.
 
9252fly
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:19 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:50 am

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 6):
Simply playing the game, the Russians will stir the pot enough to get some kind of compensations, directly or even though they will not get deal.

I would be very curious to see what the Russians have to offer. Business is business,so let's keep an open mind.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 4715
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:57 am

Quoting n49wa (Reply 4):

No chance, at all.

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 6):

If it meets the requirements and is half the price of A or B, what excuse will DOD have to reject the bid?

Where is comes from.
Hate to say it but if people thought the out cry over buying a aibus tanker was bad, this country would have a shit fit if we even thought about buying something Russian.
New airliners.net web site sucks.
 
cosmofly
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:36 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:25 am

How about we outsource the fighting forces? I am sure there will be a long line to fight for us for a fraction of the cost we are incurring  
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:36 am

It would be pretty wild if we bought a fleet of IL-76 or IL 96 tankers. I bet we could get those at a fraction of the cost.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
threepoint
Posts: 1292
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:49 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:39 am

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 8):
Hate to say it but if people thought the out cry over buying a aibus tanker was bad, this country would have a shit fit if we even thought about buying something Russian.

This always puzzled me.
EADS' tanker bid involved aircraft assembled in the US by US workers using components made all over the globe.
Boeing's tanker bid involved aircraft assembled in the US by US workers using components made all over the globe.
EADS employs a large executive, sales, design & engineering staff in the US and elsewhere.
Boeing employs a large executive, sales, design & engineering staff in the US and elsewhere.
There is really no such thing as an "American" or "French" aircraft anymore.

Presumably a Russian bid will be pitched by American staff and will involve incentives aimed at keeping US firms employed.

In any case, no matter where the aircraft originates, it will be flown & maintained by USAF personnel, so even tongue-in-cheek comments regarding outsourcing the armed forces are a bit naive. But fairness and common sense usually take a back seat in large government procurement processes.
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
 
EDICHC
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:43 am

Quoting 9252fly (Reply 7):
If it meets the requirements and is half the price of A or B, what excuse will DOD have to reject the bid?

Possible and simple reason could be lack of confidence in the ongoing supply of spares in the event of a change in the political climate.
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
threepoint
Posts: 1292
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:49 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:52 am

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 12):
Possible and simple reason could be lack of confidence in the ongoing supply of spares in the event of a change in the political climate.

Easily countered by installing a parts distribution centre in the US or licensing a local firm to build various parts at the time of award.
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
 
EDICHC
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:16 am

Quoting threepoint (Reply 13):
Easily countered by installing a parts distribution centre in the US or licensing a local firm to build various parts at the time of award.

IF the Russian constructor concerned was permitted to issue such licenses. Having a distribution centre is useless without anything to distribute.
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
kaitak
Posts: 8967
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:32 am

Personally I think the Russians must be rolling about on the floor, laughing at the prospect of IL-96s flying refuelling missions for the USAF. It is, as we Irish say, "taking the mickey" on a massive scale, BUT ...

There is another angle to this; if the Russians can put together a reasonably plausible proposal, involving a very low price and some element of production in a politically marginal state, then it has the potential to throw the whole tanker project off beam and delay it another few years, which might well be the objective of such a proposal.

Machiavellov is alive and well and living in a dacha just outside Novosibirsk ...
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:38 am

Quoting n49wa (Reply 4):
Off the top of my head I see 4 engines vs. 2 (767/A330), airworthiness certs, completely new entry to US aviation, etc.
Do you see anything that might work in their favor?

Yes. The IL-96T feighter with P&W engines is already certified by the FAA:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...768625723a00561eb6/$FILE/a54nm.pdf
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
keesje
Posts: 8864
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:01 pm

Some here wer promoting the An-70 as A400M alternative for European airforces. Now the time has come to show your true coulors I guess  
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:05 pm

That is only because this stupid RFP is tailored to make a winner from the 767! Only by demanding cheap unit prices the 767 can win over the KC-30. But guess what, if bad is cheap then worse is the cheapest.

By that stupid RFP Boeing has no chance to beat the Russian prices if they manage to deliver the minimum requirements. Will they? Why not! The bar is set only as high as KC-135 standards. A lot of aircrafts beat KC-135 capabilities. Also much cheaper ones than KC-767's.

Will be interesting to see those that demanded a cost efficient solution. Will they support the Russian offer or will we testify another swift in mindset? (you know, the best for taxpayers money is no longer so important, we changed our focus again).

Anyone who asked for cheap tankers who does not support the Russians now is demasked having a Boeing agenda. A major dilema.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:07 pm

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 6):
Simply playing the game, the Russians will stir the pot enough to get some kind of compensations, directly or even though they will not get deal.

First they have to submit a conforming bid. Just submitting a brochure won't cut it.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 15):
Personally I think the Russians must be rolling about on the floor, laughing

Aren't they always? Vodka is rather cheap there.  
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8538
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:29 pm

Price is not everything in tenders. The price factor may contribute about 30% in th deicsion making. Being 1/3 or even 2/3s cheaper than Boeing may apply only if they tinker the Il98 together at the Voronezh plant and with Russian engines. P&W and western avioniks makes the aircaft more expensive and if it has to be assembled outside Russia the price margoin is gone. Reliability requirements and operating costs will give it the rest.

No chance the Russians can win this case.
powered by Eierlikör
 
XaraB
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:23 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:00 pm

I say "Bring it on!" The more choices, the better the outcome of the bidding will be, since the different bidders are putting pressure on each others and the USAF. Everyone not biased towards one of the products should (and probably do already) applaud the increase in bidders.

It also has the interesting effect of putting the perceived favourite product, the KC-767, in the "stuck in the middle" position that many described the 330 to be earlier:
KC767
An open mind is not an empty one
 
KPDX
Posts: 2373
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:04 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:03 pm

This thread is worthless without photoshopped pictures of a USAF IL-96.   

I checked that "modified airliner pictures" website, and couldn't find anything. Someone step up to the plate a create a simple photoshop of one? (I wish I could but I can't make anything look decent with photoshop.)
View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:36 pm

The article in yesterdays Seattle Times is pretty good:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ogy/2011392418_russiatanker20.html

One of my favorite quotes from the article pretty much sums up how this competition is being perceived, "Just when I thought (the tanker competition) couldn't get any dumber this comes along"
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:59 pm

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 18):
By that stupid RFP Boeing has no chance to beat the Russian prices if they manage to deliver the minimum requirements. Will they? Why not! The bar is set only as high as KC-135 standards. A lot of aircrafts beat KC-135 capabilities. Also much cheaper ones than KC-767's.

Do you know for a fact that the Il-96 meets the minimum requirements? For one thing, I don't think they have any way to demonstrate capability as a tanker...that's a very basic requirement, don't you think?

And if there are many cheaper aircraft that can meet these requirements as you say, why are there no bids?  

   UAC needs to have a credible US partner to make this bid. I'd be gobsmacked if any major US company puts their credibillity on the line with this project. Not gonna happen.  
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
TropicBird
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:13 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:02 pm

I believe to considered a KC-X candidate aircraft, the platform has to be one of those listed in the KC-135 replacement AOA. No Russian aircraft are listed in that report.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2006/RAND_MG495.pdf
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:10 pm

Quoting TropicBird (Reply 25):
I believe to considered a KC-X candidate aircraft, the platform has to be one of those listed in the KC-135 replacement AOA. No Russian aircraft are listed in that report.

   Nope. Bidding on government contracts is open to all.
The Rand Corporation does not have any role in who gets to bid or not!
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
727200er
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:18 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:03 pm

You know what? this is great I'm having a good laugh here, but maybe this is the best thing that could happen. Seriously, this could be the final nail in this whole thing, and maybe the Air Force ends up with re-engined 135s and a few years from now they can order a 787 based tanker or even get something purpose built as a true military aircraft.
"they who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only at night" - Edgar Allen Poe
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:03 pm

Interesting they are pitching a new tanker instead of the Ilyushin Il-78T (they can't offer the Il-78M since it has no multi-role capability).
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:26 pm

Sweet! Let's expose the ignorance of the USAF even further, as this third iteration of KC-X is flawed in being set up for the cheapest aircraft that can do the job, wins! IL-96T's will be able to be sold for so much less than Boeing's KC-767 that hell, Boeing may not even bid!

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/Comm...rcraft_Pictures/Aeroflot_Il-96.jpg

And let's throw in some Su-30MK's for the USAF, while we're at it!! For the same price as every one KC-767, we can probably get a IL-96T and an Su-30MK to boot!

http://www.air-attack.com/MIL/su30mk/su30_redflag_2_20080808.jpg
 
Acheron
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Interesting they are pitching a new tanker instead of the Ilyushin Il-78T (they can't offer the Il-78M since it has no multi-role capability).

Probably has to do with the difficulty of fitting a boom to a T-tailed design like the Il-76, and how close that would bring the receiving aircraft to the stream of the tanker.
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:07 pm

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 29):
IL-96T's will be able to be sold for so much less than Boeing's KC-767 that hell, Boeing may not even bid!

For the sake of discussion, let's pretend that this is a serious bid. Why the assumption that the Il-96 is cheaper? Consider that the RFP considers the cost of infrastructure modifications as part of the total bid. The wingspan of the Il-96 is a whopping 20m (66ft) greater than the KC-135. Not even close to fitting in the existing facilities. That alone is going to make a Russian bid problematic on cost...so the aircraft itself needs to be damn cheap. The Russians don't have a fueling boom at all, much less one that meets USAF specs. I can only speculate that they intend to license the boom from EADS   and that's not going to come cheap. Nor are the engines from P&W. So...how cheap could an Il-96 tanker possibly be?
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
TropicBird
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:13 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:14 pm

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 26):
Nope. Bidding on government contracts is open to all.
The Rand Corporation does not have any role in who gets to bid or not!

True anybody can bid but they may not even be considered unless they meet the minimum requirements. The AoA study is a key requirement for the KC-X contract. The USAF got into trouble when they did not perform one for the first go around (the tanker scandal). That is why one was done before the second KC-X contract could go forward. The AoA was performed by RAND for the USAF, it was the tool used to determine the KC-X candidates and which direction the USAF should go. It is also the document which defined what was 'medium' and 'large' sized aircraft. In fact, you will notice in the AoA that the smaller aircraft (737, A320,A321) and ultra large (A380) were not considered candidates.

Article on KC-X and AoA:

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0304/031004cdam1.htm


DoD Inspector General report on KC-X (See page 38 of PDF for chart, you will note the AoA is key part of program):

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc...72197&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf


Maybe based on gross weight, the Russian aircraft can be considered. The other major problem the Russians will have is that the DoD considers 'prior performance' usually more important than price. The Russians have no prior performance with the DoD on manufacturing aircraft. I understand that is one of the main reasons EADS chose to work with NG was for the prior performance certification, however, since EADS has done well with the UH-72A helicopter contract, they could qualify as now having prior performance on their own.

The Russians will need to find a US partner with prior performance to have any competitive bid.
 
Acheron
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:30 pm

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 31):
The wingspan of the Il-96 is a whopping 20m (66ft) greater than the KC-135. Not even close to fitting in the existing facilities.

The wingspan of a Il-96 is pretty much the same than that of an A330, about 60m

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 31):
ilities. That alone is going to make a Russian bid problematic on cost...so the aircraft itself needs to be damn cheap. The Russians don't have a fueling boom at all, much less one that meets USAF specs.

I think that's the most important aspect of it all, and why I think this actually is a joke of a proposal and actually a way of Russia lending a hand to France and EADS in the KC-X by making the life of Boeing and the USAF more misserable.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 31):
I can only speculate that they intend to license the boom from EADS and that's not going to come cheap. Nor are the engines from P&W. So...how cheap could an Il-96 tanker possibly be?

Somehow, I still think it would be cheaper than what the 767 could ever be, specially one made of parts of different variants. Specially since the PW engines have already been installed and tested on the Il-96

But I think an aproximate way of comparing would be to compare the selling price of the highly modified Flankers like the Malaysian ones and the highly modified Eagles like the F-15I or the F-15K.

Quoting TropicBird (Reply 32):
The Russians will need to find a US partner with prior performance to have any competitive bid.

Lockheed?   
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:41 pm

Quoting TropicBird (Reply 32):
True anybody can bid but they may not even be considered unless they meet the minimum requirements. The AoA study is a key requirement for the KC-X contract.

The requirements are exactingly laid out in the RFP. The Rand study was information for the Pentagon and has no part in the RFP, much less a "key requirement".

We don't need to debate this point...you can read the RFP for yourself:
KC-X Tanker Modernization Program Solicitation Number: FA8625-10-R-6600
US government procurement rules tell us that they can't just toss a bid in the trash, so we know that if the Russians actually find a US partner and submit a properly constituted bid package it must be scored per the RFP.  
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:50 pm

Quoting Acheron (Reply 33):
I think that's the most important aspect of it all, and why I think this actually is a joke of a proposal and actually a way of Russia lending a hand to France and EADS in the KC-X by making the life of Boeing and the USAF more misserable.

   Not at all!! If this is real, they are doing them a huge favor by providing competition for the bid. The forfeiture by NG/EADS was an embarrassment...and a bid from Russia largely erases that.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 33):
The wingspan of a Il-96 is pretty much the same than that of an A330, about 60m

Exactly my point. Adding an accurate accounting of infrastructure costs to the RFP is a major reason why the A330MRTT bid is not cost-competitive.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 33):
Somehow, I still think it would be cheaper than what the 767 could ever be, specially one made of parts of different variants. Specially since the PW engines have already been installed and tested on the Il-96

Those American-made P&W engines are not cheap, and there are four of them. The cost to purchase and cost to maintain twice as many engines goes a long way to increasing the cost of an Il-96 tanker.  
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
Acheron
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:12 pm

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 35):
Those American-made P&W engines are not cheap, and there are four of them. The cost to purchase and cost to maintain twice as many engines goes a long way to increasing the cost of an Il-96 tanker.

The Russians are actually talking about turning the Il-96 into a twin-engined plane, so that wouldn't be 4 engines. Of course, the idea will make the risk of the KC-767 and KC-30 look like child's play.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 35):
Not at all!! If this is real, they are doing them a huge favor by providing competition for the bid. The forfeiture by NG/EADS was an embarrassment...and a bid from Russia largely erases that.

Not necesarilly, since if the bid actually favours the cheapest bidder and somehow UAC manages to meet the RFP's, then where that leaves Boeing's 767?.
Unless they once again ask the RFP to be reevaluated, then they would have to ask for the extra criteria to be evaluated. The same criteria they asked to have removed/reevaluated because it favored the A330.

Now, if we add an actual bid from EADS, then that leaves Boeing in the middle. If the RFP's is about lowest cost, you have the Russians, if then the RFP is turned to favour capabilities, then you have KC-30 on that end.
See, with the russians in it, the whole "lowest cost" argument goes out the window, and if Boeing still gets awarded, it will still be a major clusterfuck, because the russians will claim their plane cost far more less than 767 and if it gets awarded on a capability basis, then that will give the EADS more ground to protest, unless Boeing goes in with the KC-777, which will render the whole size issue moot.

Of course, all of this comes at the expense of lots of "if's", but damn, this contest now is far more interesting. I couldn't stop laughing when I read the news.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 35):
Exactly my point. Adding an accurate accounting of infrastructure costs to the RFP is a major reason why the A330MRTT bid is not cost-competitive.

But the consider that even if it has the same wingspan of an A330, it also has the fuselage diameter of a DC-10(actually, the fuselage of an Il-96 is slightly larger). So, you have a larger wingspan but also a bigger fuselage.




Then, this whole argument ignores the political fallout that a Russian bid will generate.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 4970
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:39 pm

All of this discussion ignores the point that this is a MILITARY aircraft. The military fights wars, and in the event of a war it is vital that parts for all weapons systems be readily available (after all, that is when many of them are going to be broken.) I was even very dubious about having a tanker based on a European plane; the Iraq conflict has certainly shown the cracks in the European-American alliance, and with a little more strain they could well break completely. Certainly France is capable at this point of embargoing military parts for a conflict that they disapprove of (which seems to be all of them-I have a sister in France who certainly holds that view). When in the course of human events have the US and Russia been on the same side of any serious issue since WWII? Tom Clancy would like it to happen, but I see it happening only in the world of fiction. If we are going to depend on them for a vital part of our military we might as well give up the entire game and disarm.
Also, the issue of Russian companies being able to build them so much cheaper is an illusion. There is a reason Russian companies have not broken into the world market, and it is government corruption. Until the Russians develop a system where companies have rules that they can rely on, know up front what there costs are going to be, and have impartial courts that will enforce the laws fairly they will continue to flounder. It has nothing to do with their technical competence or their wage rates.

[Edited 2010-03-20 14:48:52]
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:52 pm

Quoting Acheron (Reply 36):
The Russians are actually talking about turning the Il-96 into a twin-engined plane, so that wouldn't be 4 engines. Of course, the idea will make the risk of the KC-767 and KC-30 look like child's play.

Even better. They are proposing a non-existent aircraft...impressive.  

Quoting Acheron (Reply 36):
Not necesarilly, since if the bid actually favours the cheapest bidder and somehow UAC manages to meet the RFP's, then where that leaves Boeing's 767?.

That's a rather large "if", but "if" anybody can provide a credible bid that undercuts Boeing, they win.
Might be good news for the US taxpayer, as it pressures Boeing to keep their price down.  

[Edited 2010-03-20 16:44:24]
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:06 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Interesting they are pitching a new tanker instead of the Ilyushin Il-78T (they can't offer the Il-78M since it has no multi-role capability).

If I remember correctly - it (the KC-X) is to be ONLY a tanker, nothing else.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 38):
Even better. They are proposing a non-existent aircraft...impressive.

The KC-767NG doesn't exist either. Though the KC-45 did.

I love how the powers that be have painted themselves into this sticky situation of the lowest bid that meets the requirements wins. If the IL-96 meets the requirements, then there can be no further argument - it must be the chosen tanker. Here Boeing wanted to have the requirements worded in a way that would give them a better chance, now it might come back to bite them.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3647
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:24 am

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 31):
The Russians don't have a fueling boom at all, much less one that meets USAF specs. I can only speculate that they intend to license the boom from EADS and that's not going to come cheap. Nor are the engines from P&W. So...how cheap could an Il-96 tanker possibly be?

The "American" partner is probably Israeli Aircraft Industry (we've subsidized them enough to qualify) Seems to me they did some interesting 707-320 conversions in the past.... They'll buy old booms from stored KC-135s, refurb them and presto you've got a Russion tanker.. plus they'll probably send a few back to Russia to cover the cost of the II-96's
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:33 am

Quoting cpd (Reply 39):
If I remember correctly - it (the KC-X) is to be ONLY a tanker, nothing else.

It's primary purpose will be a tanker, but it will have secondary capabilities, as well.

And that's where the whole argument on this forum has been circling around. The KC-767 looks like it may be the better tanker, while the KC-30A offers more secondary capabilities. Since the RFP favors the tanker side, that is said to give the KC-767 the edge (whereas when the RFP was expected to favor the secondary capabilities, it was said to give the KC-30A the edge).
 
TheCol
Posts: 1857
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:30 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:45 am

Quoting 9252fly (Reply 7):
Business is business

Unfortunately that concept doesn't exist in Russia.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 33):
I think that's the most important aspect of it all, and why I think this actually is a joke of a proposal and actually a way of Russia lending a hand to France and EADS in the KC-X by making the life of Boeing and the USAF more misserable.

  

This is exactly why they entered the bid.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 37):
When in the course of human events have the US and Russia been on the same side of any serious issue since WWII?
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 37):
Russian companies have not broken into the world market, and it is government corruption. Until the Russians develop a system where companies have rules that they can rely on, know up front what there costs are going to be, and have impartial courts that will enforce the laws fairly they will continue to flounder. It has nothing to do with their technical competence or their wage rates.

  

We can't trust Russia with anything else, why this?
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:09 am

Quoting TheCol (Reply 42):
This is exactly why they entered the bid.

Don't be surprised if they make an honest bid at this - because the financial benefit would be huge, just the thing the Russian aircraft industry needs now that their own armed forces are not in the position to buy large amounts of new planes, and the civilian Russian aircraft are not really in demand.

AN-148 and Sukhoi Superjet 100 prove they can do decent, modern planes. I also think the bid is a bit of fun and games too, and those behind it will be having a big laugh about it. And it's all because they had to have this level playing field. Yes, it was equal, but some were more equal than others.

And now the Russians are exploiting it. If the IL-96 twin-engined tanker does end up meeting every requirement and is cheaper - they have to accept it as the winning bid, neither Boeing or anyone else has any right to protest about it given that this RFP is supposed to be equal for everyone.

All of this stupidity has turned the whole thing into a saga. Boeing, congress, the defence people, Northrop-Grumman are all equally to blame. Just give NG 50% and Boeing 50% and it would have all been going forward and happening. Now we have Russia bidding and the whole thing will drag on for another 5 years!

In fact, I almost want the Russian bid to be successful - because I can't wait to see the theatrics that will happen on here and in America when it happens.  It'll be hilarious - and by far the best entertainment of the last few years!

I can just imagine the violent hullabaloo over a Russian built US tanker.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 41):

It's primary purpose will be a tanker, but it will have secondary capabilities, as well.

Which will all change if the Russian plane ends up looking like the successful one. They'll have to wrangle together another lot of RFP criteria that is so finely tailored to the B767 that nothing but the B767 can win it.

[Edited 2010-03-20 19:18:01]
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:38 am

Quoting cpd (Reply 39):
If I remember correctly - it (the KC-X) is to be ONLY a tanker, nothing else.

I doubt your memory is faulty...more likely that you haven't read the actual RFP.  

Quoting cpd (Reply 39):
The KC-767NG doesn't exist either. Though the KC-45 did.

   Please. The B767 exists and has already been adapted into tankers.
No such thing as an Il-96 tanker, much less a twin-engined Il-96.

Quoting kanban (Reply 40):
They'll buy old booms from stored KC-135s, refurb them and presto you've got a Russion tanker

The KC-135 boom will not meet the RFP requirements.   
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:43 am

And...what? Is everyone forgetting that national security would be a consideration? Does anyone really think that USAF would select a mission-critical product by one of the two nations for which our strategic warheads are meant to combat?
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:03 am

Quoting cpd (Reply 43):
In fact, I almost want the Russian bid to be successful - because I can't wait to see the theatrics that will happen on here and in America when it happens.

"almost"? You seem very ready to ignore the obvious problems with the UAC's proposal.
Don't get your hopes up.  
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3647
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:22 am

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 44):
The KC-135 boom will not meet the RFP requirements.

I should have put a smiley face implying humor...   
 
JTR
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:45 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 9:01 am

This is by far the funniest thing I have seen in a long time.
 
cmb56
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

RE: Russia To Enter US Tanker Bid Battle

Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:26 am

The IL-96 may be a four engine aircraft as it sits now but to make it a twin depends on how the wing was designed. My understanding is that the A330-(200/300) and the A340-(200/300) all have the same wing. The outboard engine positions on a 330 tanker are the locations that the drogue refueling pods would be mounted and the plumbing to supply the fuel is already there. So the wing is already designed to carry a load there and to supply fuel to that position. If the Russian's origianlly designed the wing in the same way then making a twin is not a great "risk".
Anyone out there have any insight here?
Their chances of winning any business here may be slim, maybe they even just want to throw sand in the gears for Boeing. If the goal is to get the best "deal" then having competition is a must. If Boeing wants the business then sharpen the pencils.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests