DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Extra! Extra! » Full (Redacted) GAO Report on Boeing Tanker Protest

Full (Redacted) GAO Report on Boeing Tanker Protest

This just in, my friends. I haven’t had a chance to chop it yet but I invite the horde to slice and dice until I do…

GAO Decision Public Release.

– Christian

Share |

June 25th, 2008 | Extra! Extra! | 392213 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/06/25/full-redacted-gao-report-on-boeing-tanker-protest/Full+%28Redacted%29+GAO+Report+on+Boeing+Tanker+Protest2008-06-25+16%3A50%3A04Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Top OSD Officials Think Tanker Deal Can Go Ahead | Another Good Look at the Sarcos Exoskeleton » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. AhzeeDahak says:
    June 25, 2008 at 5:24 pm

    Huh. Funny how the usual crowd of EADS apol­o­gists hasn’t stepped up with even one cogent cri­tique of this GAO deci­sion.
    Is any­one else piec­ing together the redacted por­tions around page 40–45? It looks like one of the small issues with the Airbus offer­ing was that in the event of a refu­el­ing prob­lem with cer­tain extremely fast USAF air­craft, the KC-​​30/​45 would have to retract the boom and simul­ta­ne­ously dive in order to get clear of a midair col­li­sion. ‘I’ll take hurtling flamey ball of death for $108 bil­lion, Alex.’

    Reply
  2. pfcem says:
    June 26, 2008 at 12:37 am

    Rix,
    You aren’t sup­pose to know. If you did you could propably fig­ure out for your­self that progams cho­sen for “past per­for­mance” eval­u­a­tion where cho­sen for a rea­son OTHER THAN to actully gauge the likely per­for­mance of the two offeres…

    Reply
  3. SMSgt Mac says:
    June 26, 2008 at 1:45 am

    RE 1: Sorry but it is the GOA quot­ing the USAF, Boeing just hap­pend to make it pub­lic.
    RE 2: By the way Mac, lets us all know when you get to the part where the GOA explains why they chose to side one way on the inconsistent/​contradictory threshold/​objective vs ‘trade-​​space’ fac­tor of the RFP…
    1. I’ll let any­one who wants to read the GAO doc decide what it says instead of mis­stat­ing it as you did. Really, there’s not enogh time in the day to
    2. No Problem, Mon!

    Reply
  4. Ross says:
    June 26, 2008 at 7:07 am

    People ignor­ing what is maybe a minor detail but still, with bud­getary prob­lems these days — the 36% cost growth fac­tor in the engines for boeing’s pro­posal? What else is going to spi­ral out of boeing’s pro­posed bud­get costs with regards to its decades old air­craft?
    Boeing’s argu­ment is by no means water­tight, and it still appears to me as if EADS should be given the contract.

    Reply
  5. pfcem says:
    June 26, 2008 at 4:46 pm

    Ross,
    Enough of the BS about the KC-​​767AT being an old air­craft! In fact it would be MORE cor­rect to say that the KC-​​30 is OLDER than the KC-​​767AT since the A330-​​200-​​based tankers that cur­rently exist are close to the NG/​EADS KC-​​X offer than the 767–200-based tanker that cur­rently exist are to the Boeing KC-​​X offer.
    The NG/​EADS KC-​​30 offer is/​was to be pow­ered by GE CF6 engines, are you going to say that it is pow­ered by decades old (decades older than ANY 767) engines? ;)
    Where did you get the 36% cost growth fac­tor in the engines for Boeing’s pro­posal? What is the cost growth fac­tor for NG/EADS’s proposal?

    Reply
  6. irtusk says:
    June 26, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    i’ve been work­ing on the ‘refu­elling all planes’ part of the deci­sion and try­ing to fill in the (numer­ous) blanks
    one clue came from this line:
    > warns tanker pilots that they

    Reply
  7. irtusk says:
    June 26, 2008 at 5:12 pm

    also does any­one find this line sur­pris­ing:
    “Northrop Grumman pro­vided to the Air Force with its EN response a FAA Type Certificate for the Airbus A330-​​200 and A330-​​300 series air­craft, which iden­ti­fied the max­i­mum oper­at­ing limit air­speed as 330 KIAS and the design div­ing speed as 365 KIAS.“
    is the A330 really that slow?
    all other ref­er­ences peg even the ‘eco­nom­i­cal’ cruise speed at well over 400 knots
    am i com­pletely miss­ing what’s going on here?

    Reply
  8. coviepresb1647 says:
    June 26, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    Irtusk,
    No, that line does not sur­prise me as it ref­er­ences KIAS (Knots INDICATED Airspeed), not true air­speed (KTAS). At higher flight lev­els, KIAS is always notably less than KTAS. 310 KIAS at FL300 may be around 450–480 KTAS.

    Reply
  9. irtusk says:
    June 30, 2008 at 5:57 pm

    http://​www​.flight​global​.com/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​s​/​2​0​0​8​/​0​6​/​2​7​/​2​2​4​9​4​3​/​g​a​o​-​f​a​u​l​t​s​-​u​s​a​f​-​f​o​r​-​b​a​s​i​c​-​e​r​r​o​r​s​-​o​n​-​t​a​n​k​e​r​-​c​o​n​t​r​a​c​t​.​h​tml
    “For exam­ple, the A330 is lim­ited by flight-​​control soft­ware to a max­i­mum speed of 330kt (610km/​h), which falls short of the min­i­mum speed that the USAF requires to con­duct a so-​​called “over­run” manoeu­vre.
    Northrop first responded to this short­fall by advis­ing the USAF to change its manoeu­vre speed, but lost the argu­ment, the GAO reports. The USAF then accepted Northrop’s claim that the A330 already safely achieves higher speeds in dives. The GAO noted that a com­mer­cial aircraft’s max­i­mum oper­at­ing speed applies to any regime of flight, but the USAF eval­u­a­tor was unaware of this.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      So are you saying the grenade launcher is a hoax or the M-16?...
      WJS
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Dear Cannon Fodder; Only politically correct patriots should be accepted...
      Zandor
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
      LOL Still all this pissing an moaning about the editorial...
      Philo
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare that...
      Philo
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Islame isn't a race, genius……
      Philo
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I sure as hell don't need to have someone take pictures of me...
      Zandor
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "Now please tell me where in the Bible Jesus or his disciples...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      No, I am not a muslim. And no, the Koran does not say anything about...
      DualityOfMan
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage