Boeing KC-767 vs. EADS KC-30

[Gawain 0]

I was just reading a rather unremarkable article about this contest in the Economist (Feb. 2nd):

Later this month, the US Air Force will declare its decision on a replacement to the KC-135 (Boeing 707).

Normally, EADS would not have entered into this if they didn't think they had a chance in the wake of the USAF/procurement bureaucrat/Boeing "scandal" related to a lease of the KC-767.

Now the stakes are higher, it's no longer a $24B lease contract, it's a $100B procurement contract, the second largest of all time.

In the end, it is Congress that has the final say. Even though 60% of the KC-30 would be built in Mobile, Alabama, it does little for the American economy.

Boeing, naturally has a better chance, especially since it makes no sense to the American taxpayer to reward a company receiving multiple direct foreign government subsidies.

So, who's going to get it? My money's on Boeing.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[1969912 0]

May the best bidder win. But I think (and hope) it will be Boeing.

The crap that Michael Sears and Darleen Druyun apparenly pulled while at Boeing was inexcusable and stupid. Phil Condit seems like a real piece of work too (in his personal life, anyway).

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[kallend 2,184]

Quote

So, who's going to get it? My money's on Boeing.

I think the Chinese should have a say, since it's their money we will be borrowing.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gawain 0]

Here's a link to the column, http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10608706

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Zenister 0]

I wonder how much effect the requirements of 'other' platforms based on the 707 (many of which are coming up or past end of life) are factored into the AF's tanker requirements..

common parts makes maintenance, support and training significantly easier..

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[ExAFO 0]

Anything involving the French in our defense supply chain nauseates me.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[tbrown 26]

This is an election year. The entire House and 1/3 of the Senate are up for re-elction. I don't think ANY of them want to have to explain a vote in favor of EADS.

Phil Condit (or Fill Condom, as I prefer to think of him) and Harry Stonecipher are both happily departed from Boeing and both are just lucky they're not stamping license plates. But American jobs are American jobs and the tanker will save the 767 line and the jobs that depend on it, so I say stick with Boeing.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[billvon 3,132]

> Anything involving the French in our defense supply chain nauseates me.

Better French than Saudi - and we will depend a LOT more on the Saudis than the French for that tanker.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

> Anything involving the French in our defense supply chain nauseates me.

Better French than Saudi - and we will depend a LOT more on the Saudis than the French for that tanker.

Not quite following you there...but I know you're making a point of some sort.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,132]

>Not quite following you there...

Our military depends far more on oil than on French hardware; the Saudis are our second largest supplier of oil (and the second largest supplier of what that tanker will be carrying.) That worries me a lot more.