USAF KC-46A Tanker Update

ImageForum for news and discussions on miltary aviation matters.

Forum rules
Image
Post Reply
User avatar
ehusmann
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 6090
Joined: 03 Aug 2005, 14:34
Location: Loures, Portugal

Post by ehusmann »

SquAdmin wrote:
aviodromefriend wrote:No, at both the dates given here, (Christmas Eve and Jan,1) Bush is still in charge. At that time the winner of the elections (whoever it may be) has not been inaugurated already.
Ok, that might save the winner's ass...
And I truly cannot see how a new president can really change the decision ´just like that´. Based upon the now released RFP, it seems to my amateur eye Airbus/Northrop is in favour. If a new president wants Boeing to get the order, without Airbus being able to complain, they need to completely rewrite the RFP. That takes months, if not years. Then, the contestants need to completely renew their offer, taking a year at the least and then the decision has to made again, taking months again. So if the new president wants the whole process to rerun with a Boeing favourable RFP, it will take surely 2 years or more before the contract can be signed. I honoustly do not see that happening.
But, I have been proven wrong before....

Erwin
User avatar
SquAdmin
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 3743
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 11:04
Location: C a/d Y

Post by SquAdmin »

Latest news in this saga is that Boeing might use the B777 in its new proposal.

Boeing has been sued for the delay of KC-767 deliveries by Japan and Italy now. If that's your track record you might wonder how much there is to gain from a new bid procedure...
Greetz,

Patrick
aviodromefriend
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 3523
Joined: 03 Dec 2006, 22:10
Type of spotter: zo snel afgekeurd, ik kreeg geen kans S5 te worden
Location: Airshows, EHKD, Where HAT eh took me

Post by aviodromefriend »

And the word "today" in the name of this topic becomes more and more ridiculous. Maybe we should read "sometime in the (far?) future" instead.
De Zamboni heeft kramp in zijn achterwiel
Jan Maarten Smeets, Heerenveen 31 oktober 2009
User avatar
Rockville
Scramble Addict
Scramble Addict
Posts: 1648
Joined: 24 Nov 2007, 00:38

Post by Rockville »

Boeing Mulls Leaving Air Force Tanker Rebidding

WASHINGTON - U.S. aerospace giant Boeing said Friday it may exit the rebidding for a massive contract to build U.S. Air Force aerial refueling tankers unless the Pentagon allows more time to rework its proposal.

The Department of Defense (DoD) was forced in June to rebid the $35 billion contract after congressional auditors found flaws in the Air Force's decision to award it to Northrop Grumman and its European partner, EADS.

Boeing's loss of the contest in February to rival Northrop and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company, parent of Airbus, raised protectionist hackles in the U.S. Congress and shocked the market. Boeing has been the sole supplier of the refueling tankers.

The Pentagon contract is for 179 aircraft, the initial phase of a fleet replacement project worth about $100 billion over the next 30 years.

A Boeing withdrawal from the rebidding would leave the lucrative contract without competition.

Boeing spokesman Dan Beck told AFP that his company needs six months to present a new bid because the company thinks the new requirements now call for a plane that can carry more fuel than the original proposal.

"We have asked the Pentagon to allow a six-month timetable for submittal of proposals in this competition," he said in a phone interview.

"The reason we're asking for that is since the issuance of the draft request for proposal two weeks ago, as we've engaged in our discussions with the Pentagon, and .... they're asking for a different kind of airplane than they asked for in the first competition."

Beck added, "If we don't get the sufficient time to prepare that proposal, there's really little option for us other than to no-bid in this competition."

The politically charged battle over the contract to build 179 tankers - one of the largest defense contracts in recent years - pits the KC-45, a militarized version of Airbus's 330, and the KC-767, a new version of the Boeing 767.

The Government Accountability Office in June upheld Boeing's challenge of the Air Force decision, saying it found "significant errors" in the evaluation of the two bids.

The Air Force decided in February it preferred Northrop's KC-45 entry, a militarized version of the Airbus 330, because it was larger and could carry more fuel and cargo than Boeing's KC-767, a modified version of the Boeing 767.

The Boeing spokesman said Aug. 22 that after three meetings between Boeing and Pentagon officials, the company has concluded the new bid will require a plane capable of carrying more fuel than the plane it originally offered.

"This is a new competition. Make no mistake about that. The requirements have changed," Beck said.

The DoD has said it will release the final request for proposals next week.

In response to a question about Boeing's options if the Pentagon does not allow extra time, he said: "One of the options we would have is to protest the (bidding process)."

Shares in Boeing climbed more than 2 percent to $65.02 in early morning trade in New York.

The Air Force's attempts to find a replacement for its aging tanker fleet have run into setback after setback, beginning with a procurement scandal in 2003 that dashed its plans to lease the aircraft from Boeing.

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 22 Aug 11:56 EDT (15:56 GMT)
User avatar
ehusmann
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 6090
Joined: 03 Aug 2005, 14:34
Location: Loures, Portugal

Post by ehusmann »

And the mud wrestling really started. Boeing threatens to step out if there is not more time, Northrop Grumman threatens it will be very costly if there will be more time :?
It is going to be fun the coming months :D

Northop Grumman: Any Delay to Amended Request for Proposal Process Harms Warfighters and American Taxpayers

Erwin
wamovements
Scramble Addict
Scramble Addict
Posts: 2079
Joined: 14 Jun 2007, 20:50
Subscriber Scramble: wamovements

Post by wamovements »

If Boeing pull out the airbus can't be selected. The decision has to be based on a competition, and without Boeing, Airbus is in it alone, and there is therefore no competition. So the USAF must give them more time :-) I agree, strange way of selecting an aircraft but it is one of the rules.

Smart guys from Boeing, hope they will win.
Last edited by wamovements on 26 Aug 2008, 15:19, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
SquAdmin
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 3743
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 11:04
Location: C a/d Y

Post by SquAdmin »

wamovements wrote:Smart guys from Boeing, hope they will win.
And it's the same tactic that EADS used in the last competition. Boeing could have easily won the very first contract if they would not have bribed USAF officials.
Greetz,

Patrick
User avatar
flying_kiwi
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 5451
Joined: 10 Nov 2004, 14:33
Location: Either EHEH, NZTA, or enroute
Contact:

Post by flying_kiwi »

wamovements wrote:If Boeing pull out the airbus can't be selected. The decision has to be based on a competition, and without Boeing, Airbus is in it alone, and there is therefore no competition. So the USAF must give them more time.
Not quite true. If Boeing decides not to bid, then the USAF are free to select the Northrop-Grumman offering.
The advantage for the USAF is that NG have already bid on this contract, and they wouldn't be able to raise the price without risking trouble with the Air Force and Congress.

As I understand it, the GAO's decision was that the USAF had to clarify a number of points in the RFP, not issue a new one. Among the points raised was that it must be clearly stated that capabilities above the threshold values required in the RFP would be given extra credit in the competition, something that was implied but not explicitely stated in the original RFP.

Everything that is going on now, smacks a bit of both sides throwing their toys out of the pram in order to gain political advantage. If Boeing say they won't bid and they get given extra time to prepare a new bid, then NG will claim that Boeing are being given preferential treatment, and they'll most likely claim that they won't bid in that case.

In the end, I think that the NG offering will be reselected, as the changes in the RFP haven't really changed the way the two aircraft will be judged compared to the first time around. Either way, it's messy and whatever the final decision is, the fallout will have some serious consequences.

Regards,
Yorden
User avatar
SvB
Scramble Newbie
Scramble Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: 17 May 2007, 19:00
Location: 's-Hertogenbosch

Post by SvB »

Pentagon Cancels Tanker Competition

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1221052 ... whats_news" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


SvB
User avatar
ehusmann
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 6090
Joined: 03 Aug 2005, 14:34
Location: Loures, Portugal

Post by ehusmann »

ehusmann wrote:So if the new president wants the whole process to rerun with a Boeing favourable RFP, it will take surely 2 years or more before the contract can be signed. I honoustly do not see that happening.
But, I have been proven wrong before....
There you have it, I am proven wrong.... What a freakshow this is turning into! How much longer is this going to take and WHAT are they going to pick. If it takes much longer, maybe the A350 and B787 might be in the race.... as well as new Brazilian, Chinese and Russian planes! :~?~:

Erwin
aviodromefriend
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 3523
Joined: 03 Dec 2006, 22:10
Type of spotter: zo snel afgekeurd, ik kreeg geen kans S5 te worden
Location: Airshows, EHKD, Where HAT eh took me

Post by aviodromefriend »

Finally some kind of decision TODAY :)

Interesting to see if or how this is going to be an issue at the elections in November.
De Zamboni heeft kramp in zijn achterwiel
Jan Maarten Smeets, Heerenveen 31 oktober 2009
User avatar
SquAdmin
Scramble Master
Scramble Master
Posts: 3743
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 11:04
Location: C a/d Y

Post by SquAdmin »

aviodromefriend wrote:Interesting to see if or how this is going to be an issue at the elections in November.
Could very well happen. McCain has been accused of favoring the European candidate (or more precise: the non-Boeing option because he was furious about the corruption during the first contest). So the Obama team could put this forward whenever they feel like.
Greetz,

Patrick
wamovements
Scramble Addict
Scramble Addict
Posts: 2079
Joined: 14 Jun 2007, 20:50
Subscriber Scramble: wamovements

Post by wamovements »

Well, I have to say that I like this decision as I still like it to see the good old KC-135's :-)
User avatar
kiwi
Scramble Addict
Scramble Addict
Posts: 1473
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 22:24
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Post by kiwi »

Whatever the next decision might be, the Pentagon is going to be blamed for canceling the contest so that they can pick freely...
User avatar
Wijgert IJlst
Scramble Addict
Scramble Addict
Posts: 2189
Joined: 06 Sep 2002, 08:57
Type of spotter: F2
Subscriber Scramble: Wijgert IJlst

Post by Wijgert IJlst »

SquAdmin wrote:
aviodromefriend wrote:Interesting to see if or how this is going to be an issue at the elections in November.
Could very well happen. McCain has been accused of favoring the European candidate (or more precise: the non-Boeing option because he was furious about the corruption during the first contest). So the Obama team could put this forward whenever they feel like.
Is it likely that the Obama administration would choose the Boeing variant over Airbus/Northrop-Grumman variant, after Obama has taken over the White House?

How sure are you the Democrates fafour the B767 above the A.330? The Democrates now also have a majority in parlement and the house of congress.

Any one has seen press releases on this subject recently?
Kind Regards / Groeten,

Wijgert IJlst
Post Reply

Return to “Military Aviation News”