Boeing Tanker: Beans, Bullets, Oil, and politics .. and did we mention: politics ??

[nugget61]

Thanks for giving us the meat of that.
As someone who works with both Boeing and Airbus products daily (ups), Airbus makes shitty, shitty products. Granted, the AF forgot to consult me on their decision, but as a whole I think that we would be doing a lot better with a Boeing product.
And while its not related to performance or the military at all, a Boeing contract would help our economy (albeit just a smidge).

 

[Xtndr50boom]

But you also have to ask "How tradeable is the 355 KIAS requirement?" Are there solid operational reasonings behind that number with today's a/c, or is it possibly a legacy of older platforms?

It's a legacy number from the SR-71 days. The idea being during a receiver overrun the tanker would accel to 355 and the SR would slow to whatever and S-turn. Being the ARCTs and END-ARs were so tight, they needed their gas on point, and on time.

I've never been over 330 in a KC-10 AAR, and apart from some secret stuff that they might be testing, I can't think of anything that would need that kind of smash.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Thanks for giving us the meat of that.
As someone who works with both Boeing and Airbus products daily (ups), Airbus makes shitty, shitty products. Granted, the AF forgot to consult me on their decision, but as a whole I think that we would be doing a lot better with a Boeing product.
And while its not related to performance or the military at all, a Boeing contract would help our economy (albeit just a smidge).

Care to elaborate?

 

[snake020]

Care to elaborate?

They assemble planes in France.

 

[A4sForever]

They assemble planes in France.

.... by people who like cheese that smells like feet ...

 

[Pugs]

They assemble planes in France.

Where there is a government mandated 35 hour max work week, where the average (but not all) of the population thinks very little of America and hence is not motivated to provide what we would consider a high quality product and where they strike at the threat of a drop of the hat.

Not exactly the support model I want for my critical assets.

 

[raptor10]

And where Mother Russia owns 10% of the company...

Sweet post FlyinSpy.

 

[voodooqueen]

.... by people who like cheese that smells like feet ...

And they might just delight in making sure that the end product eternally smells like feet.

 

[nugget61]

Care to elaborate?

I can't just pin down one thing - its like going from a cobalt to a bmw3 - its all of the little things to come together to make one great product. Airbus seems to cut corners and shave pennies, with the end result a much cheaper product.

 

[HeyJoe]

Surprising? Not when you consider that GAO works directly for Congress and they know who their master is.......so, despite all the seemingly indepth analysis, they are usually influenced by whomever they want to please (IMHO).

 

[VetteMuscle427]

So does Boeing have a chance to re-do their proposal and make it more competitive? Or will it just be a paper pushing exercise to make the airbus fit?

 

[FLY_USMC]

I'm glad Boeing is getting a second chance. I grew up in an economy where Boeing tankers were the lifeblood, and as far as I can tell, they took very good care of their own. And who are we kidding really, it's not like these tankers are flying around at 9 g's inverted stressing them to their limits. Like my buddy who flies KC-135's said, "give me some new engines and a glass cockpit and this thing will be fine for another 50 years." He was flying the old straight jet 135's at the time, and has since switched to the newer ones. If I were the Air Force, I'd just CX the whole tanker thing and buy more Raptors.:icon_wink

 

[Xtndr50boom]

my buddy who flies KC-135's said, "give me some new engines and a glass cockpit and this thing will be fine for another 50 years." He was flying the old straight jet 135's at the time, and has since switched to the newer ones.

That was all well and good when a 135 would only fly a few times a month (mostly sat cocked for SAC ALERT FORCE), but since SAC went away, and especially OEF/OIF, those birds are being badly abused and put away wet. Even the 10 is taking a beating, and they're 20+ years newer.

Add that you've got a plane that's either a tanker or a small cargo bird (can't do much of either at the same time), boom or probe but rarely both ATST, and you've got all the makings of a proud but tired aircraft ready to be replaced. Whether it's airbus (IMHO, would make a better tanker), or boeing, it needs to get here soon

 

[mtsupilot09]

The 134th ARW just recently got turbofans on their KC-135s. I grew up close to the Knoxville Airport, where there is a TN ANG base, and those 135s were flying a good bit. Haven't been to Knoxville in a few years, but flying through Knoxville recently I saw them on the guard ramp and noticed the new engines. Heard they got glass too, and yeah, they might last another 50 years but I definitely can see the need for a newer tanker very soon. I'm very disappointed about Boeing not getting their contract. I mean if we start giving contracts to the Frenchies, what's next? Mirages and Saabs flying out of our bases and carriers? If I end up living my dream and becoming a Naval aviator, I'd like to defend our nation in an American airplane. Not that I wouldn't fly a Mirage if they gave me one.

 

[phrogpilot73]

Here's the deal... From what I can see (as a contractor who supports NAVAIR), RFP's are written with a Prime Integrator already in mind. On top of that, said Prime Integrator will (once they're awarded the contract) submit engineering change proposals when they don't meet what's required in the RFP's. It's a shady business...