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

[brownshoe]

Wow. The government is doing such a great job with this! Maybe we should let them control our healthcare and childrens education?

Wait.....what thread am I in now?

Gotcha! Scary, huh?

Steve

 

[HeyJoe]

....sigh. We're never gonna see a new tanker fly, are we?

Stop work in progress due to protest

 

[mmx1]

Boeing's official Protest

for your perusal:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/library/RedactedProtestFull_IntroSummary.pdf

Interesting tidbit - it claims the KC-30 will be unable to refuel tilt-rotor aircraft such as the V-22.

 

[Flash]

for your perusal:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/library/RedactedProtestFull_IntroSummary.pdf

Interesting tidbit - it claims the KC-30 will be unable to refuel tilt-rotor aircraft such as the V-22.

I don't think it really matters that much, I think that need would be rare.

 

[Pugs]

I don't think it really matters that much, I think that need would be rare.

Until it's not. Aircraft we buy these days need to last 50 years. Better buy the most flexible you can.

 

[Flash]

Until it's not. Aircraft we buy these days need to last 50 years. Better buy the most flexible you can.

In the grand scheme of things though I think it is very small hit against the aircraft. You can't have everything, even though the USAF tries all the time. The KC-30 is more flexible in other areas that are of higher priority, like much more fuel and cargo capacity. And I think that MC-130 and KC-130's will be able to provide the USAF and USMC with all their V-22 refuelling needs anyways.

 

[phrogdriver]

for your perusal:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/library/RedactedProtestFull_IntroSummary.pdf

Interesting tidbit - it claims the KC-30 will be unable to refuel tilt-rotor aircraft such as the V-22.

I couldn't find why it can't. It drags a standard Navy drogue, right. Unless its stall speed is 250 knots or something, I'm at a loss.

 

[mmx1]

I think Boeing's claims are inflated and hyperbole, but I just wanted to hear from folks here since that seemed particularly relevant (if true).

The protest also alleges that a fully loaded KC-45 might have too high a stall speed to refuel a C-130.

 

[HeyJoe]

I couldn't find why it can't. It drags a standard Navy drogue, right. Unless its stall speed is 250 knots or something, I'm at a loss.

I've waited in line behind hapless S-3B Vikings that could catch the tanker with proper intercept geometry, but struggled to get enough "impact" energy to seat the probe in the drogue.

Regardless, for the CV and MV-22 CONOPS, KC-130 variants are far more ideal anyway.

 

[HeyJoe]

I think Boeing's claims are inflated and hyperbole, but I just wanted to hear from folks here since that seemed particularly relevant (if true).

The protest also alleges that a fully loaded KC-45 might have too high a stall speed to refuel a C-130.

Here's some local reporting from Tacoma that offers yet more insight into the tanker saga.

 

[Pugs]

GAO back Boeing in Tanker recompete

Details at

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/business/19tanker.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin

 

[HooverPilot]

Somehow I think that the AF is going to be the loser in all of this. More bad press, extensive delays, and an aging platform staying around longer possibly degrading service to the "fleet".

Will we ever be able to award a major contract again without 3x secondguessing?

 

[A4sForever]

GAO backs BOEING protest

GAO backs BOEING tanker protest

Who sez ol' guys don't know anything?? If any of you boys have a need for consulting work, please keep me in mind::icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

W/ the high level, public "executions" of senior AF officials ... watch for Boeing to get another look-see in the tanker go-'round.

There's already a full-court press going on compliments of the totally ineffective WA state delegation. And Boeing's corporate HQ is now in Chicago, IL. Now what other politician of recent repute is from there .... ???

Remember -- it's ALWAYS politics & $$$$ first in line w/ military procurement contracts .... always.

:icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

(thread merged)

 

[Mumbles]

Not to turn this thread political....but I remember A4s a few weeks ago mentioning that Boeing was still banking on getting the contract because a certain presidential candidate from Chi-town, (Boeing's new corporate HQ) would be amenable to it.

 

[raptor10]

What's political about defense contract negotiations?