Comments on: Boeing ALMOST Picks 777 Tanker http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/ Online Defense and Acquisition Journal Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:20:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: afret91http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-10134 afret91 Sat, 04 Jul 2009 19:16:17 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-10134 Why dont we convene a panel of tanker and aircraft aircrews who have used them and offer some real world suggestions as to what a tanker should be and do and stop trying to make it another McNamara F111 yard dart. Piss on the politicians, they couldnt fly a kite much less know what to build in a functional tanker airplane. Why dont we convene a panel of tanker and aircraft aircrews who have used them and offer some real world suggestions as to what a tanker should be and do and stop trying to make it another McNamara F111 yard dart. Piss on the politicians, they couldnt fly a kite much less know what to build in a functional tanker airplane.

]]> By: jameshttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9290 james Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:45:06 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9290 Tranche? Lol. Tranche? Lol.

]]> By: pfcemhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9222 pfcem Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:23:20 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9222 LockMartSkunk,NG showed you a similar tanker flying around but what they showed you was not the KC-30 they proposed. If it was their SDD time & cost would be zero...If Boeing wanted to play the game of showing similar tankers there are currently three Japanese & two Italian KC-767s flying but only one Australian KC-30 flying. ;)Of course the Australian KC-30 is closer to NG/EADS's KC-X proposal than the Japanese & Italian KC-767s are to Boeing's KC-X proposal. LockMartSkunk,

NG showed you a similar tanker flying around but what they showed you was not the KC-30 they proposed. If it was their SDD time & cost would be zero…

If Boeing wanted to play the game of showing similar tankers there are currently three Japanese & two Italian KC-767s flying but only one Australian KC-30 flying. ;)

Of course the Australian KC-30 is closer to NG/EADS’s KC-X proposal than the Japanese & Italian KC-767s are to Boeing’s KC-X proposal.

]]> By: Takerhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9221 Taker Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:10:54 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9221 An actual plane that isn't fast enough to comply with all USAF refueling procedures. That requirement will probably be written out of the next RFP, however. An actual plane that isn’t fast enough to comply with all USAF refueling procedures. That requirement will probably be written out of the next RFP, however.

]]> By: LockMartSkunkhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9216 LockMartSkunk Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:57:41 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9216 I gotta say it's kinda amusing seeing what goes back and forth on these boards regarding the tanker program. I see the same boeing fanatics like pfcem and generally a couple different folks for NG. Working with both the Boeing and NG tanker teams I feel like both of you don't really have a clue what is going on with the program and are just waiting for more clarification. What I do know is that when I met with the NG tanker teams they showed me an actual plane flying around. When I met with the Boeing team, they showed me a computer simulation. That's all I have to say. I gotta say it’s kinda amusing seeing what goes back and forth on these boards regarding the tanker program. I see the same boeing fanatics like pfcem and generally a couple different folks for NG. Working with both the Boeing and NG tanker teams I feel like both of you don’t really have a clue what is going on with the program and are just waiting for more clarification. What I do know is that when I met with the NG tanker teams they showed me an actual plane flying around. When I met with the Boeing team, they showed me a computer simulation. That’s all I have to say.

]]> By: jimbohttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9211 jimbo Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:44:39 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9211 the boeing prosal is in the same boat.. its an imaginary plane, w/untested equipment... its all blueprints and no plane... the boeing prosal is in the same boat.. its an imaginary plane, w/untested equipment… its all blueprints and no plane…

]]> By: Aurorahttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9210 Aurora Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:13:27 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9210 Spot on, Howard regarding both counts. This controversy should have ended last July and had the USAF thrown out NG's bid, they would likely have a funded tanker. Spot on, Howard regarding both counts. This controversy should have ended last July and had the USAF thrown out NG’s bid, they would likely have a funded tanker.

]]> By: Howardhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9208 Howard Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:05:17 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9208 Well, considering that in the last go around, the NOC tanker was technically non-compliant and shouldn't have been awarded, unless NOC and EADS have changed their plane, and their bid they will still be non-compliant (assuming the RFP is similar to the last one).Oh, and the Aussie A330MRTT hasn't transfered fuel at all yet. The hose connections last week were dry according to the news releases. That program is already a year behind as well. Well, considering that in the last go around, the NOC tanker was technically non-compliant and shouldn’t have been awarded, unless NOC and EADS have changed their plane, and their bid they will still be non-compliant (assuming the RFP is similar to the last one).

Oh, and the Aussie A330MRTT hasn’t transfered fuel at all yet. The hose connections last week were dry according to the news releases. That program is already a year behind as well.

]]> By: Keep It Simplehttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9207 Keep It Simple Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:50:06 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9207 I feel politics will again blur what is best for the USAF and the USA. I feel politics will again blur what is best for the USAF and the USA.

]]> By: pfcemhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9169 pfcem Mon, 15 Jun 2009 21:55:52 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9169 So ONCE AGAIN, Boeing is saying it will make a proposal based on a platform which best fits the requirements/criteria (what ever they may be) while NG/EADS is saing that it will walk away unless they see the requirements/criteria as favoring their already once rejected proposal & which the KC-X Source Selection Team could not justify how it determined that the NG/EADS proposal even meet certain requirements/criteria & for which the GAO made one of if not the most strongly worded decisions in most anyone's memory INCLUDING that the KC-X Source Selection Team did not assess the relative merits of the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation.I especcially LOVE Colin's wishful thinking that "it may be that Boeing is largely conceding the first tranche of planes to Northrop and aiming for the larger follow-on buy" when Boeing's announcement indicates exactly the opposite.In related news, three of Japan's KC-767s are now officially operational (with at least two of Italy's expected to be by the end of the year IIRC) and the one Australian KC-30 has transfered fuel (via hose - still nothing I can find referring to boom) in flight. So ONCE AGAIN, Boeing is saying it will make a proposal based on a platform which best fits the requirements/criteria (what ever they may be) while NG/EADS is saing that it will walk away unless they see the requirements/criteria as favoring their already once rejected proposal & which the KC-X Source Selection Team could not justify how it determined that the NG/EADS proposal even meet certain requirements/criteria & for which the GAO made one of if not the most strongly worded decisions in most anyone’s memory INCLUDING that the KC-X Source Selection Team did not assess the relative merits of the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation.

I especcially LOVE Colin’s wishful thinking that “it may be that Boeing is largely conceding the first tranche of planes to Northrop and aiming for the larger follow-on buy” when Boeing’s announcement indicates exactly the opposite.

In related news, three of Japan’s KC-767s are now officially operational (with at least two of Italy’s expected to be by the end of the year IIRC) and the one Australian KC-30 has transfered fuel (via hose — still nothing I can find referring to boom) in flight.

]]> By: Aurorahttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9163 Aurora Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:02:21 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9163 The comments on Ron Sugar being prepared to "walk away" are interesting to say the least. So their committment to the tanker program has had "political costs" and doesn't appear to be without limit? I'm not surprised. Given NG's large exposture on other defense programs, I think it would be extremely risky to pursue a "scorched earth" policy to win the tanker contract at any cost and alienate members of congress, who would normally be friendly to the company.Why make enemies in Congress for the sake of a European airframe? Perhaps Northrop Grumman is looking for an "out" here? The comments on Ron Sugar being prepared to “walk away” are interesting to say the least. So their committment to the tanker program has had “political costs” and doesn’t appear to be without limit? I’m not surprised. Given NG’s large exposture on other defense programs, I think it would be extremely risky to pursue a “scorched earth” policy to win the tanker contract at any cost and alienate members of congress, who would normally be friendly to the company.

Why make enemies in Congress for the sake of a European airframe? Perhaps Northrop Grumman is looking for an “out” here?

]]> By: Colin Clarkhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9160 Colin Clark Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:13:35 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9160 LMSkunk,Haven't heard anything to that effect. However, I would LOVE to see a tanker version of the 380! Imagine that thing taking off with a full load... LMSkunk,

Haven’t heard anything to that effect. However, I would LOVE to see a tanker version of the 380! Imagine that thing taking off with a full load…

]]> By: LockMartSkunkhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/15/boeing-almost-picks-777-tanker/#comment-9159 LockMartSkunk Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:36:19 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=7185#comment-9159 So does this mean that the guys over at NG are going to use their next size up in the Airbus platform? So does this mean that the guys over at NG are going to use their next size up in the Airbus platform?

]]>