Comments on: Lynn To Lead Tanker Buy?

By: Sgt JFK

Sgt JFK — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:10:44 +0000

Back on your meds Buddah–

By: BuddhalovesPaine

BuddhalovesPaine — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:10:24 +0000

What a crock… US society needs tanker aircraft about as bad as it needs more cases of AIDS and Syphilis. These are nothing more than tools for barbaric imperialists. Oh oh oh! I forgot their are evil monsters out there that are trying to destroy our freedoms. The funny thing is even if they could build an invisible viking ship and sail over here and conquer the US what would the US become? Why it would become a phony religious phony capitalist country that mistreats women. Wow, what a big revolution that would be!

By: Hitch Hiker

Hitch Hiker — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:27:03 +0000

Ask why Gates is so miffed at the Air Force? What’s their history on this program? If the Deputy Secretary can’t be the lead for a major system acquisition what’s he doing there? Delegating this decision down is not the answer.

By: Sgt JFK

Sgt JFK — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:29:57 +0000

JD, Don’t forget the N/G part of the KC-45 or the workers assembling parts in Alabama. I’m a Huge fan of the “What have you done for the PFC Warrior today?” work code, by the way. Thats the way military management should work!
Lets get a look at how Boeing management has performed on the sustainment/upgrade contracts with the KC-135 and exactly where they source their production parts from before we paint them red white and blue and give them a blank check.

By: fred thomas

fred thomas — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:08:49 +0000

Lynn came from DOD to K street back to DOD and Obama promised no more lobbiests to come to and from govt but now this boeing hack will ensure that the unions and boeing get the plane as EADS and NGs idea of insourcing jobs at a time when America could use some good competition will not happen. Why does Gates continue to hang on for this fool Obama and his puppets of Pelosi and Ried

By: JD Cotham

JD Cotham — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:03:37 +0000

In the Army’s 2nd Infantry Division we had a saying that challenged leaders by asking “What have you done for PFC Warrior today?” In times of bad leadership the soldiers might ask “What have you dome TO PFC Warrior today?”

Soldiers and Airman deserve the best equipment and the best leadership. When the AF chose the Airbus 330 as the next tanker, I feel there was a huge breach in the decision making process.

EADS is funded by European governments who could care less about the United States or PFC Warrior. Boeing has been in the business of supporting PFC Warrior since it’s inception and it is an AMERICAN company.

The A330 is a very capable airplane, yet the B-767 is as well. I say keep the contract in America and let DOD have the decision making authority for the KC-X program. It’s obvious the AF leadership or lack there of cannot get it right.

By: Sgt JFK

Sgt JFK — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:01:19 +0000

I would love to see sustainment costs for the old ass KC-767. Now the KC-777 I think would be a game changer!

By: jimbo

jimbo — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:38:11 +0000

ya i say overhall the aquisitions programs

By: The Cenobyte

The Cenobyte — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:27:32 +0000

The idea that we still don’t have a design for something that for the most part is 1950s tech is really pretty sad. We spend as much money figuring out which one we want to get as we do buying the first 10 of them. Imagine if we had just said, well what’s on the market now and put a team of like 10 guys together to pick one of them to buy. We would already have these things.

By: cdr. p.w.prawl

cdr. p.w.prawl — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:24:23 +0000

As long as Congress treats DOD as its own special pork program, and is unwilling to impose “conflict of interest” rules on itself that it has imposed on DOD procurement officers, procurement practices will not change. Just try reading the Federal Acquisition Regulations/DAR SUPPLEMENT!!!!

By: John the civi

John the civi — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:43:10 +0000

They can sue, but if the process is done right, they will lose.

By: rfl

rfl — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:30:47 +0000

If Gates believes that “too few people come to work in the Pentagon asking how can I make sure our warriers come home safely,” he has not been in the same building in which I have been. What the Sec Def should be worrying about is why and where he sends the warriors to start with. And answering the question of why Afghanistan and why this level of commitment with no logical end in sight is what he needs to puzzle over and leave the warfighting to the professionals

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:39:22 +0000

Considering that the problem is more the industry (and Congress!) than the USAF, I'm not so sure that it matters who runs the program! Everyone claims that "split buy" was far too expensive, completely unworkable, etc., but you're going to be sued for any single-contractor award. That's a guarantee. Even if the Holy Ghost came down from heaven and said "N/G GETS TO BUILD THE TANKER", Boeing would sue (and vice versa.)

By: Charles Phillips, LtCol USAF Ret

Charles Phillips, LtCol USAF Ret — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:36:12 +0000

If the AF can’t handle a program to buy an aircraft — we are in deep trouble! But one thing that will increase costs and slow down procurement is more involvement by OSD. The lower level that you allow people to make decisions the better off you are. Decisions could be reviewed at the OSD level but please don’t have them handle the procurement decisions.