If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
On Mar 12, 5:56*pm, "Bob Gardner" wrote:
Don't you have that backward? Boeing's 767 tanker is flying in Italy (and another country. Japan?) today and has been for a couple of years. EADS has never built a tanker. Japan got their first tanker just last month. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
On Mar 12, 5:56 pm, "Bob Gardner" wrote:
Don't you have that backward? Boeing's 767 tanker is flying in Italy (and another country. Japan?) today and has been for a couple of years. EADS has never built a tanker. Bob Gardner I believe that the design Boeing offered to the USAF was not the same as the one currently being built for Italy and Japan- it's based on the 767-200LRF airframe rather than the 767-200ER. And while the airframes themselves have been flying since 2005, they only started testing the refueling systems last year and none have actually entered service yet. First deliveries are supposed to be in the first quarter of 2008. It's still been around longer than the A330-MRTT variant, but the disparity isn't as large as it first appears. Boeing still has a great deal more experience building tankers, of course, but I'd hesitate to call either of these designs significantly more mature than the other. -JTD |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
Now wouldn't you think.. that after Boeing got in trouble.. ok.. not Boeing
but a high up muckymuck in the Pentagon that went to work for Boeing.. got in trouble over the KC-X program.. that Northrop/EADS would have a complaint of Boeing got the contract? Wait.. Northrop is an AMERICAN company.. so what's the big whup all about.. B "Kingfish" wrote in message ... On Mar 12, 10:12 am, AJ wrote: Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award Says KC-X RFP Differs From Criteria Cited In Going with KC-45A snip long story on Boeing's whining... This shouldn't surprise anyone familiary with gov't contracts. With the huge $$ at stake in the KC-X program I expected the loser (whomever that would be) to appeal. Apparently that's the automatic response to losing a big contract now. Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin/ Agusta Westland did the same when the USAF chose Boeing's HH-47 for the CSAR-X program. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
Ron Lee wrote: Bob Gardner wrote: EADS has never built a tanker. Really ? You seem to be confused. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330_MRTT A330 MRTT / KC-30B Type Aerial refuelling and transport Manufacturer EADS (Airbus) Maiden flight 15 June 2007 So they have eight months of tanker experience (that may be generous) versus how many DECADES for Boeing? What does KC135 experience have to do with it ? In any event, EADS is supplying the AIRFRAMES, and jolly fine airframes they are too. Northrop Grumman is doing the tanker conversion stuff for this contract. Do you have a problem with Northrop Grumman ? Airbus have shown a consistent ability to deliver the goods over the years too. They don't outsell Boeing by accident. Graham |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
On Mar 13, 12:18*am, Jeff Dougherty
wrote: I believe that the design Boeing offered to the USAF was not the same as the one currently being built for Italy and Japan- it's based on the 767-200LRF airframe rather than the 767-200ER. *And while the airframes themselves have been flying since 2005, they only started testing the refueling systems last year and none have actually entered service yet. *First deliveries are supposed to be in the first quarter of 2008. *It's still been around longer than the A330-MRTT variant, but the disparity isn't as large as it first appears. Boeing still has a great deal more experience building tankers, of course, but I'd hesitate to call either of these designs significantly more mature than the other. I recall Boeing's Advanced Tanker was some kind of hybrid, like you said it's based on the 767-200LRF but it has a different wing. (can't find a source for this) The 767 has been around longer than the A330 for sure, but I don't think that lessens the risk in developing a refueler based on that plane. Either airplane would be a huge improvement over the creaky KC-135 (now I'm reading they may not be in as bad a shape as was previously believed) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
Eeyore wrote in
: Ron Lee wrote: Bob Gardner wrote: EADS has never built a tanker. Really ? You seem to be confused. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330_MRTT A330 MRTT / KC-30B Type Aerial refuelling and transport Manufacturer EADS (Airbus) Maiden flight 15 June 2007 So they have eight months of tanker experience (that may be generous) versus how many DECADES for Boeing? What does KC135 experience have to do with it ? What have you got to do with it , planespotter? Bertie |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
On Mar 13, 9:46 am, Kingfish wrote:
On Mar 13, 12:18 am, Jeff Dougherty wrote: I believe that the design Boeing offered to the USAF was not the same as the one currently being built for Italy and Japan- it's based on the 767-200LRF airframe rather than the 767-200ER. And while the airframes themselves have been flying since 2005, they only started testing the refueling systems last year and none have actually entered service yet. First deliveries are supposed to be in the first quarter of 2008. It's still been around longer than the A330-MRTT variant, but the disparity isn't as large as it first appears. Boeing still has a great deal more experience building tankers, of course, but I'd hesitate to call either of these designs significantly more mature than the other. I recall Boeing's Advanced Tanker was some kind of hybrid, like you said it's based on the 767-200LRF but it has a different wing. (can't find a source for this) The 767 has been around longer than the A330 for sure, but I don't think that lessens the risk in developing a refueler based on that plane. Either airplane would be a huge improvement over the creaky KC-135 (now I'm reading they may not be in as bad a shape as was previously believed) Per Aviation Leak at: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...aw031008p2.xml The airframe that was actually being offered, the -200LRF, appears to still be in development. According to the article, it had the airframe of a 767-200, wings from the -300F freighter, and cockpit and empennage from the -400ER model. The 767 is a proven airframe, but I'm not sure that putting together all those parts and trying to make them work together is a low-risk strategy. In contrast, I believe that the KC-767s for Italy and Japan are straight up conversions of the -200ER airframe, similar to Airbus' proposal for their KC-X competitor. With that in mind, meseems that it's a bit of a stretch to call the KC-767 that's now getting ready to enter service and Boeing's KC-X proposal the same airplane. They're both tankers based on the 767, but their construction seems radically different. -JTD |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
Jeff Dougherty wrote in
: On Mar 13, 9:46 am, Kingfish wrote: On Mar 13, 12:18 am, Jeff Dougherty wrote: I believe that the design Boeing offered to the USAF was not the same as the one currently being built for Italy and Japan- it's based on the 767-200LRF airframe rather than the 767-200ER. And while the airframes themselves have been flying since 2005, they only started testing the refueling systems last year and none have actually entered service yet. First deliveries are supposed to be in the first quarter of 2008. It's still been around longer than the A330-MRTT variant, but the disparity isn't as large as it first appears. Boeing still has a great deal more experience building tankers, of course, but I'd hesitate to call either of these designs significantly more mature than the other. I recall Boeing's Advanced Tanker was some kind of hybrid, like you said it's based on the 767-200LRF but it has a different wing. (can't find a source for this) The 767 has been around longer than the A330 for sure, but I don't think that lessens the risk in developing a refueler based on that plane. Either airplane would be a huge improvement over the creaky KC-135 (now I'm reading they may not be in as bad a shape as was previously believed) Per Aviation Leak at: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...y_generic.jsp? channel=awst&i d=news/aw031008p2.xml The airframe that was actually being offered, the -200LRF, appears to still be in development. According to the article, it had the airframe of a 767-200, wings from the -300F freighter, and cockpit and empennage from the -400ER model. The 767 is a proven airframe, but I'm not sure that putting together all those parts and trying to make them work together is a low-risk strategy. It's been done for years by all sorts of manufacturers, including Boeing. Bertie |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Boeing Formally Protests US Air Force Tanker Contract Award
On Mar 13, 1:14*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jeff Dougherty wrote : On Mar 13, 9:46 am, Kingfish wrote: On Mar 13, 12:18 am, Jeff Dougherty wrote: I believe that the design Boeing offered to the USAF was not the same as the one currently being built for Italy and Japan- it's based on the 767-200LRF airframe rather than the 767-200ER. *And while the airframes themselves have been flying since 2005, they only started testing the refueling systems last year and none have actually entered service yet. *First deliveries are supposed to be in the first quarter of 2008. *It's still been around longer than the A330-MRTT variant, but the disparity isn't as large as it first appears. Boeing still has a great deal more experience building tankers, of course, but I'd hesitate to call either of these designs significantly more mature than the other. I recall Boeing's Advanced Tanker was some kind of hybrid, like you said it's based on the 767-200LRF but it has a different wing. (can't find a source for this) The 767 has been around longer than the A330 for sure, but I don't think that lessens the risk in developing a refueler based on that plane. Either airplane would be a huge improvement over the creaky KC-135 (now I'm reading they may not be in as bad a shape as was previously believed) Per Aviation Leak at: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...y_generic.jsp? channel=awst&i d=news/aw031008p2.xml The airframe that was actually being offered, the -200LRF, appears to still be in development. *According to the article, it had the airframe of a 767-200, wings from the -300F freighter, and cockpit and empennage from the -400ER model. *The 767 is a proven airframe, but I'm not sure that putting together all those parts and trying to make them work together is a low-risk strategy. It's been done for years by all sorts of manufacturers, including Boeing. Fair enough. The AvLeak article made it sound like a relatively high- risk approach that turned off the Air Force, but the key word there may be "relatively". Thanks for the clarification- I'm not even remotely familiar with airliner manufacture and I guess it showed. It'll be interesting to see how this all turns out. At the risk of pontificating (again) about something I don't really understand, it seems to me that the real take-home lesson is that we can look forward to pretty much every major defense contract award being protested unless and until the rules are changed. There's pretty much no downside to losing the protest, and it gives you the potential to swing the contract and all the associated millions. I wonder how long it will be before procurement officers start building time into their project schedules to deal with "routine" protests? :-) -JTD |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Boeing to File Protest of U.S. Air Force Tanker Contract Award | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 3 | March 12th 08 09:20 PM |
Boeing contract with Navy could help with Air Force tanker deal | Henry J Cobb | Military Aviation | 0 | June 20th 04 10:32 PM |
How Boeing steered tanker bid | Henry J Cobb | Military Aviation | 60 | April 24th 04 12:29 AM |
The U.S. Air Force awarded BOEING CO. a $188.3 million new small-diameter precision-guided bomb contract | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 3 | October 28th 03 12:07 PM |
Air Force announces small diameter bomb contract award | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 9th 03 09:52 PM |