The decision to uphold the Boeing protest of the airborne tanker award to Northrop Grumman Corp. raises fundamental questions about the ability of the Air Force — and the Pentagon in general — to buy weapons effectively, according to lawmakers, congressional aides and defense analysts.
“The GAO’s decision in the tanker protest reveals serious errors in the Air Force’s handling of this critically important competition. We now need not only a new full, fair and open competition in compliance with the GAO recommendations, but also a thorough review of — and accountability for — the process that produced such a flawed result,” said the Senate’s senior defense lawmaker, Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, in a June 18 statement.
The congressional Government Accountability Office upheld Boeing’s protest of a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract awarded to Northrop Grumman and Airbus parent European Aeronautic Defence and Space, and it recommended that the service hold a new competition. The GAO said it found “a number of significant errors” that could have affected the outcome of “what was a close competition.”
The contract for 179 aerial refueling tankers is the first of three deals worth up to $100 billion to replace the Air Force’s entire tanker fleet over the next 30 years.
The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee was more understated in his criticism.
“The GAO did its work, and the Air Force is going to have to go back and do its work more thoroughly,” Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) said in a statement.
Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state, a vociferous Boeing supporter, said the GAO criticisms “were a scathing indictment of the Air Force’s process.
A congressional aide said the Air Force may be on the brink of collapse from the accumulated weight of bad acquisition, personnel and strategic decisions.
“You have to ask how much more can the Air Force take. Are they really that broken? Not just on acquisition but across the board. Are they more broken than any other services or is it just their time in the glass house?” the senior congressional aide said.
This aide, who has been sharply critical of Air Force acquisition practices in the past, said that the ruling by the Government Accountability Office makes the appointment of the next Air Force Chief of Staff “more than a critical appointment. They need a miracle worker.”
A defense analyst said the Air Force — and the military in general — now faces a crippled system for buying anything.
“At this point the procurement system is so broken that I believe that we are at a structural disarmament point, and we certainly will not fund a strike Air Force,” the analyst said. This source noted that the Air Force lost its bid to buy more F-22s and pointed to the Navy and Coast Guard’s broken acquisition efforts as further sign of the crippled state of Pentagon acquisition.
The head of Boeing’s tanker programs, Mark McGraw, said the company welcomed the ruling, “fully supporting the grounds of our protest. We appreciate the professionalism and diligence the GAO showed in its review of the KC-X acquisition process. We look forward to working with the Air Force on next steps in this critical procurement for our warfighters.”
While the GAO decision is not binding, it puts tremendous pressure on the Air Force to reopen the contract and could help Boeing capture part or all of the award. It also gives ammunition to Boeing supporters in Congress who have been seeking to block funding for the deal or force a new competition.
– Colin Clark
> the process that produced such a flawed result
i love how he tries to conflate the process with the result
the GAO even specifically that its finding had nothing do with which was the superior product
The GAO came out with some specific reasons for their criticism of the AF bid. I don’t know if the AF response will be public or not, but I would like to know the “key performace” items the GAO said were handled improperly.
Yes lets have a free and fair competition where they guys with the most pork bring home the bacon.
Heaven forbid that the forces get the most effective kit at the right time. After all they hardly register in the voter population.
This is a clear message thet the USA will shaft you in business just like Russia (fund the exploration and then allow a take over or go to jail).
This is going to be a primo excuse for Europe to fee the USA with an empty tit !!
Yes lets have a free and fair competition where they guys with the most pork bring home the bacon.
Heaven forbid that the forces get the most effective kit at the right time. After all they hardly register in the voter population.
This is a clear message thet the USA will shaft you in business just like Russia (fund the exploration and then allow a take over or go to jail).
This is going to be a primo excuse for Europe to fee the USA with an empty tit !!
It would be nice if they would set aside politics for a little while so the military might actually be able to buy something. I think this ruling is going to open the door for the Democrats to cut defense procurement so they can shift the money to other goverment programs.
I would like to see how its going to effect the 3rd round too
http://www.militarypersonalchecks.com
Boeing’s minions on the move — right on schedule.
These days Boeing is better at ripping off the US tax payer than building a better product. Europe may take retaliatory measures if Boeing’s temper-tantrum prevails.
Why even bother with a ‘competition’ if politicians are going to intervene, either domestically or internationally?
We will keep having competitions until the politicians get the ‘right’ choice. That’s fair.
It is time for a third party airplane builder, instead of Boeing and EADS. China or Russia would be fitting.
Right up untill they announced the winner of the contract Boeing said the “selection process was fair and trnsparent” and when they lost they are crying foul? They were putting out false claims about Northrop’s tanker being a french aircraft, rallying their congressional cronies to buy “American”. Let me get this straight Boeing agreed that the process was transparent, They knew Northrop would go with a bigger Airframe, They could of based theirs on the 787 but were too arrogant and thought they had it all but won. The GAO is setting a dangerous precedent here, Boeing will try and strong arm every contract they bid for now. It will take years to get these systems to the warfighter. It’s hard to believe given the Tanker fiasco 3 years ago that the Airforce would do anything to stupid getting these badly needed aircraft into service. Seems like Boeing is throwing money at the GAO. These Fat A-$-$ Congressmen like Murtha need to stop feeding their own political egos and give the warfighter the best equipment.
Ken, look at the previous post…I included the entire GAO letter describing their rationale…
Even worse, how will we EVER sell anything to Europe?
Bring in Scaled Compsites, Mojave CA for some new tanker project or examine the All blended wing Boeing 797 for a next Gen Tanker model for TransPac missions alone.
Yes the Blended Wing 797.
>Yes the Blended Wing 797.
Agree, Boeing should consider aborting 767, and bring in 797, or should 777 and 787 be one of the options?
>Even worse, how will we EVER sell anything to Europe?
Did European countries abort buying F-35 yet? They’ll be forced to buy American, in such options they are behind in technology. US has much more to spend on R&D.
You know, I wonder if Gates knew this might be coming? He selected a logistics guy for Chief of Staff. Watch for thunder on Capitol Hill. I am hoping this guy gets up there and basically flips off Boeing and tells everyone he is going for the plane that will be the best for the nation’s interests because it is the best plane for the job.
Its not Northrop’s fault that the Boeing design sucks and is based on a much older airframe than that of the KC-45. Boeing, suck it up, you have been losing bid after bid because of one reason, you guys are recycling old ideas. Your best sellers are ones that were first created by Mcdonnell Douglas. So get a backbone, realize you lost and get to work. The F-15, F-18, and the AH-64 are old airframes now, get with the program.
The only thing all of this proves is that our government,the Pentagon,& the Military-Industrial Complex do not take seriously the Global War on Terror.You tell me who is still acting like it’s September 10,2001? We are supposed to be in the fight for our lives & our very way of life,but our leadership is playing silly BS games with our economy,fuel,& now even food.
There is a “vicious” rumor that all of those Taliban prisoners that “escaped” from that prison were indirectly let out by the U.S.(or at least the green light was given from the U.S. for the Taliban to attack the prison & break them out) to justify continuing the fighting in Afghanistan.
You can see just how seriously the GWOT is taken when we can’t even get a simple air tanker replaced & a new one put into service.Could you see or even imagine the same political games being played during World War II like is being played today?
Why should I take the Global war on Terror seriously when it is SO OBVIOUS that my own government doesn’t?
Really Roy? And what credible source can you give me that the U.S “gave the green light” for the Taliban to attck the prison, or that the U.S let them out? Really, I’ve heard some pretty ridiculous acusations on Defense Tech, but the one you just leveled has to be the most absurd comment I’ve heard yet. To claim that our military leaders are in some way conspiring with our enemy to continue this current war is insulting to any self-respecting member of our armed forces and is downright shameful. If you have a CREDIBLE source from where this information came from then please share it with us. If not then please refrain from posting such trash.
There are several Russian words that can be translated as “devil” or “demon” (different from the proper name “Satan” or “The Devil”). “Chyort” is one of them, and “Chertoff” resembles an English transliteration of its genetive plural form. Chertoff does not mean “son of the Devil” (that would be “Syn’ Shaitana”). I doubt the word “Chertoff” has its roots in the word “chyort”, but then I am qualified to comment only on grammar, not on the etymology of Russian names. Roy Smith is qualified to do neither.
Which is the larger point. His posts make it evident that he is not qualified to comment intelligently on any subject, so quit rising to his bait. Please. Your second grade teacher was right when she said “it only encourages him.”
There are several Russian words that can be translated as “devil” or “demon” (different from the proper name “Satan” or “The Devil”). “Chyort” is one of them, and “Chertoff” resembles an English transliteration of its genetive plural form. Chertoff does not mean “son of the Devil” (that would be “Syn’ Shaitana”). I doubt the word “Chertoff” has its roots in the word “chyort”, but then I am qualified to comment only on grammar, not on the etymology of Russian names. Roy Smith is qualified to do neither.
Which is the larger point. His posts make it evident that he is not qualified to comment intelligently on any subject, so quit rising to his bait. Please. Your second grade teacher was right when she said “it only encourages him.”
Chris,
Right up until they announced the winner of the contract Boeing THOUGHT the selection process was fair and transparent but when the KC-X selection explained its decision it became OBVIOUS (to Boeing & others) that it in fact was not.
The KC-30 IS NOT a NG tanker, it is a A330-200 (or A330-200F) airframe MANUFACTURED mostly in France by Airbus (a subsidiary of EADS) which NG plans to “americanize” into a tanker during final.
Yes Boeing knew that NG/EADS was going with an A330-200 based platform & it believed (just like MOST EVERYONE who knew jack about USAF tanker requirements & operations) that the A330-200 was too big & too heavy. Boeng looked at offering a 767–200, 767–300, 767–400 & even a 777–200 based platform & concluded that the 767–200 was the right sized platform which could met or exceed all of the key requirements of the KC-X as stated in the RFP.
Yes Boeing could have offered a 787 based platform but would have likely lost based on the cost & risk of creating a “KC-787″.
The GOA has NOT set ANY precedent here. The USAF (the KC-X selection in particular — not the USAF as a whole) did not conduct a fair & transparent competition and the GOA agreed with Boeing that it “had made a number of significant errors that could have affected the outcome of what was a close competition”.
Boeing will NOT try and strong arm every contract they bid for now. It will (as it has EVERY RIGHT TO DO but VERY RARELY does) protest those cotracts which it feels have significant enough errors/flaw to warrent doing so.
Yes it is hard to believe given the Tanker fiasco 3 years ago that the Airforce would do anything to stupid getting these badly needed aircraft into service BUT IT DID. And I contend that it did so even though it did not want to but was FORCED to do so by outside influance…
Boeing is NOT throwing money at the GAO.
These Fat A-$-$ Congressmen & other beaurocrats need to stop feeding their own political egos & putting the desires of outside (even foreign) entities ahead of their own constituents and give the warfighter the best equipment (which we COULD have been getting as early as 2006).
> Yes Boeing knew that NG/EADS was going with an A330-200 based platform & it believed (just like MOST EVERYONE who knew jack about USAF tanker requirements & operations) that the A330-200 was too big & too heavy
no, it believed that it had bribed enough people that it would win no matter what
> Boeing will NOT try and strong arm every contract they bid for now.
no, they will make sure they have all their stooges in a row next time so it happens quietly
> And I contend that it did so even though it did not want to but was FORCED to do so by outside influance…
all your melodramatic whining about outside influence is beyond hillarious
in fact, it’s pathetic
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_27/b3840095.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A21584-2003Oct26?language=printer
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Galloway_033104,00.html
i think it’s pretty clear that Boeing has more than it’s fair share of outside influence
my goodness, when you have the PRESIDENT order his chief of staff to ‘get it done’, how can you POSSIBLY whine about being opposed by ‘outside influence’?
bizarro world
and if you listen to all the senators’ (D-Boeing) rhetoric about how they’ll make sure the AF choose the ‘right’ plane, it becomes pretty clear that the airforce’s mandate was indeed ‘To hold a fair and open competition that Boeing wins’
the fact that the AF made such a politically unpopular decision speaks volumes about how superior they feel the KC-30 is
Ed,
Its not Boeing’s fault that the NG/EADS design is based on an Airbus airframe that is too big & heavy that despite its greater CAPACITY is actually inferior in CAPABILITY and that the USAF was FORCED by outside influances to alter its criteria (& reality) in order to make the non-competative KC-30 APPEAR competative so that there would even BE a “competittion” or that the USAF felt compelled by such strong outside influances to chose a tanker which it (& most everyone else) KNEW was the wrong one for the USAF.
The KC-767AT IS NOT an older airframe. Is a 2008 Corvette an “older” car than a 2008 Mustang because the 1st Corvette was introduced 12 years before the 1st Mustang?
EADS should suck it up & recognize that the KC-30 is not the right tanker for the US to replace its KC-135s with.
freefallingbomb:
take your whiny, lame, loser Eurotash ass and your shitty Eurotanker with you. The KC767 was and IS the superior tanker, and the American taxpayer has been saved from the boondoggle of your crappy Eurotanker. You can cry all you want, but it still won’t change the fact that Boeing has, does, and will FOREVER make better planes than your government-owned P.O.S. company Airbus. KC-767 all the way! WOOHOO!
Our US-101 is British. Our C-27J is Italian. Our M249 is Belgian. Our UH-72A is German. That’s just off the top of my head. Let’s not be so quick to fly off the handle assuming foul play.
It’s also quite flawed to assume that the KC30 is inherently a better value for the taxpayer than the KC767 simply because the first A330 was built more recently than the first 767. If I tell you your job is to pound nails into the frame of a house and you can choose between a hammer based on a design from 100 years ago or a brand new jackhammer … you get the drift. The right tool for the job is not necessarily the newest, sexiest, or largest. So … a little less acrimony and a little more intelligent discourse please.
Man-oh-man! freefallingbomb is quite the anti-semitic, conspiracy driven nut-job.
To the poster “C4Casey”:
You completely missed the point of my answer to the poster “Roy Smith”: I merely agreed with him that there is a slight possibility of a secret U.S. Nazi — al-Qaeda Collaboration. It may not be a proven fact yet, but after that enormous (but rather strange…) success of the Talibans with their prison-break it’s not entirely fiction either, and it would not even be the first time in History that that happens… just ask your President about his family’s connections to the (original) Nazis, oh blissful American ignorant!
I recommend the same to any other guys here who call “me” an anti-Semite or a “conspiracy-nut”!
More questions?
To the same poster “C4Casey”:
P.S.:
FACT NR. 2: Bush (I + II) is also buddy-buddy with Bin Laden’s entire family, who even repeatedly bailed out Bush II’s bankrupt oil-drilling businesses in the U.S.A. .
HARD FACT NR.1: The F.B.I. officially concluded all investigations into 11 / 9 saying that Bin Laden and even ANYONE ELSE inside his al-Qaeda organization are COMPLETELY INNOCENT of the 11 / 9 attacks:
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2006/0608-BinLaden.html
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2001/09/47109
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/06/fbi-has-no-evidence.html
http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html
Etc.
DUBIOUS FACT NR. 2: As your President, Bush would NEVER lie to you about being seriously committed to capturing that one odd Laden family member, right?
Now you tell me, pink-eyed sheeple (or paid professional Pentagon spy / disinformer / propagandist) : Why did you invade Afghanistan again?
freefallingbomb,
Though you are not anti-semtic, you are indeed conspiracy-driven. “Nut job” remains to be seen. Nothing is further from the truth that what you and Roy have said. Bush’s family has connections to the Nazi’s. OK, what of that? My friend has connections to the Vikings that plundered and killed my ancestors. That doesn’t make my friends evil or stupid. Robert E. Lee had a direct connection to the CSA, with her man-stealing (slavery), yet that doesn’t make him evil or stupid. One of the job site superintendents had indirect connections to the mafia through a friend yet had no desire to join or become a part of the mafia. That doesn’t make him evil or stupid.
I assume now that you will start quoting the so-called Elders of Zion.
It is you who are the “pink-eyed sheepie, (disinformer, etc.)”. You have yet to show any credible sources for your so-called “facts”. Until you do so, your “facts” are merely hypotheses.
Roy,
Yes, as my meteorologist friend confirms, they are researching a weather machine. However, no one has successfully tested or even deployed a weather machine yet. So, the weather-machine-induced storms are currently storms in your own head.
OMG — We’ve got someone citing well known crackpot Jeff Rense to prove their argument!!!