Comments on: Top OSD Officials Think Tanker Deal Can Go Ahead

By: pfcem

pfcem — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 06:49:34 +0000

irtusk,
Yes it is only flaws in the PROCESS that favor one particular team that are being examined BUT my point was that it was flaws were in the PROCESS, not flaws in the offers as you had stated.
If you think there were flaws in the process that favored Boeing have fun finding them. I am sure that if Boeing had won NG/EADs could have found something but the question then becomes if what they found would have been suficient for the GOA to recommend that the USAF “reopen discussions with the offerors, obtain revised proposals, re-evaluate the revised proposals, and make a new source selection decision, consistent with the GAO

By: irtusk

irtusk — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:50:36 +0000

as predicted, pushing through was a non-starter
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/06/25/af-chief-nomination-could-be-at-risk/
“However, the latest we are hearing is that OSD officials, who thought as last as 6 p.m. last night that the tanker deal could go ahead without being rebid are now looking at some sort of fly-off as a compromise.”

By: irtusk

irtusk — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:24:47 +0000

> It is not flaws in either of the offer but flaws in the PROCESS
but so far only flaws in the PROCESS that favor one particular team are being examined
do you truly believe that there were ZERO flaws in the process that favored Boeing?
> Unfortunately
my what big crocodile tears you have ::rolleyes::
> in that it has now been made public that (under the rules of the process) the NG/EADS offer DID NOT meet all requirements (or there is not sufficient evidence to establish that it did not not) & DID NOT “beat” the Boeing offer in a number of criteria as had been announced.
and my point was that it’s likely the Boeing bid ALSO didn’t meet all the criteria, it simply hasn’t been subjected to the same scrutiny … yet

By: pfcem

pfcem — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:18:55 +0000

Bill,
Boeing’s EXACT complaints are spelled out in its protest.

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:18:26 +0000

If NG didn not meet the requirements set in the Request for Proposal then they are in defaut with a “No Bid” and their proposal should be rejected as per the regulations.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:17:30 +0000

irtusk,
It is not flaws in either of the offer but flaws in the PROCESS with which the USAF (or more correctly the KC-X source selection evaluation team — it really is unfair to blame the ENTIRE USAF) used in its selection. It is disingenuous to fault/critisize Boeing for protesting when anyone who has followed the process much knew full well there was going to be a protest no matter which offer was chosen — that only SUPPORTS the fact that the process was wrong.
Right now all the points are anti-KC-X source selection evaluation team & how their errors flawed the selection towards the NG/EADS offer. Unfortunately in that it has now been made public that (under the rules of the process) the NG/EADS offer DID NOT meet all requirements (or there is not sufficient evidence to establish that it did not not) & DID NOT “beat” the Boeing offer in a number of criteria as had been announced.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:44:55 +0000

What’s interesting is how hard it is to get any facts on this story. What EXACTLY is Boeing’s complaint, except they didn’t win? What are the specific errors, biases, etc. in the contract procedures? As an ex Boeing employee (it’s required to live in Seattle), I root for Boeing, but emotions aside, I have no idea what the actual facts of the matter are and ProPublica has not illuminated the matter.

By: Mad

Mad — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:56:06 +0000

This is totally pointless, what are the chances after all this ridiculous interference that N-G will win this contract again? Should’ve just saved everyone the time and effort and given it to boeing without going for the re-bid. What a bunch of corrupt idiots.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:54:02 +0000

irtusk,
No they can not. Not unless they can come up with the $35++ billion dollars (come on we ALL know KC-X like most all recent defense programs is going to end up significantly over budget) out of their own personal bank accounts. Funding for the KC-X will not get through either the Legislative (Congress) or Executive (President) at this point UNLESS the GOA signs off on it.

By: Rix

Rix — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:34:59 +0000

Last week I was looking at a beautiful antique auto on display in a museum. It was a ’56 Fairlane. Then I thought “Holy crap, the air force flies planes that rolled off the assembly line at the same time as this car.” I hope whatever the AF does, they do it soon.