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
  • Af-Cam
  • 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
  • Crazy Ivan
  • 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
  • F-35 Watch
  • 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 Bubble with Joe Buff
  • 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
  • PEO Soldier
  • 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

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • 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 » The Tanker Tango » FLASH: NO Tanker RFP Til Next Admin

FLASH: NO Tanker RFP Til Next Admin

boeing-kc767.jpg

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, clearly worried that the atmosphere is so poisoned by the battle between Boeing and Northrop and tainted by the poor performance of the Air Force, has decided to punt and leave any tanker RFP to the next administration.

Rather than hand the next Administration an incomplete and possibly contested process, Secretary Gates decided that the best course of action is to provide the next Administration with full flexibility regarding the requirements, evaluation criteria and the appropriate allocation of defense budget to this mission, the Pentagon release said this morning..

The release quoted Gates, saying that It is my judgment that in the time remaining to us, we can no longer complete a competition that would be viewed as fair and objective in this highly charged environment. The resulting cooling off period will allow the next Administration to review objectively the military requirements and craft a new acquisition strategy for the KC-X.

The first congressional reaction was positive, from one of the Capitols most important money men. I believe that Secretary Gates made the right decision in providing the next Administration with the opportunity to review the requirements and proceed with a new solicitation. Our committee advised the Defense Department to ensure that there was enough time for legitimate competition. This decision will allow for that, Rep. John Murtha (D-Penn.) said in a statement. He signalled pretty clearly that the House Appropriations defense subcommittee would come up with whatever money might be needed to keep the tankers flying. Now our job will be to work with the Department to make certain that our current tankers, that are over 40 years old, will be rehabilitated to ensure we have tankers available for world-wide Air Force missions, he added.

Read the rest of this story and more updates from DoD Buzz.

– Colin

Share |

September 10th, 2008 | The Tanker Tango | 406414 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/09/10/flash-no-tanker-rfp-til-next-admin/FLASH%3A+NO+Tanker+RFP+Til+Next+Admin2008-09-10+18%3A19%3A26Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Russian Force to the Caribbean | Thursday — Fire for Effect » »

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. AirSix says:
    September 10, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    Secretary Gates was for the tanker before he was against it.

    Reply
  2. Tartan69 says:
    September 10, 2008 at 2:57 pm

    Someone at the very highest levels should be fired for allowing this whole debacle to get to this point.

    Reply
  3. Eduardo says:
    September 10, 2008 at 3:40 pm

    Someone won this round. And it was not Northrop Grumman.

    Reply
  4. John says:
    September 10, 2008 at 3:59 pm

    Same old military procurement process, designed to be as expensive as humanly possible.
    So what’s the criteria now? We just keep bidding until Boeing wins?
    I hope whoever takes over the next administration fires every AF employee connected with this. Then bans Boeing from bidding on govt work for a decade.

    Reply
  5. Trent Telenko says:
    September 10, 2008 at 4:00 pm

    >Someone at the very highest levels should be
    >fired for allowing this whole debacle to get to
    >this point.
    IIRC, the USAF CoS and Civilian Secretary were canned for a lot of reasons, some stated, most not.
    This seems to have been one of the unstated ones.

    Reply
  6. reshtet says:
    September 10, 2008 at 7:26 pm

    Man,if they can’t get a needed Tanker going what
    lies are they covering up in Iraq/Afghan???? And the tan fill color is back,from a site I order music from???

    Reply
  7. George Hanshaw says:
    September 10, 2008 at 7:56 pm

    The problem here is with DOD procurement:
    1. USAF procurement officer extorts retirement job from Boeing as a condition of doing business with them.
    2. USAF procurement people do ‘bait and switch’ by using source selection criteria that were in direct conflict with RFP.
    3. DOD procurement tries to bluff their way past the reality that their changed RFP restarts the whole program.
    Finally, even Gates saw the writing on the wall. As a former USAF procurement offical I can tell you that DOD PROCUREMENT HAS NEVER PAID ANY ATTENTION TO PROCUREMENT LAW, buying off wronged contractors with future fat contracts so they didn’t protest.
    But when the USAF procurement official who was extorting a job from Boeing got caught and both she and Boeing were punished, the rules changed. If the federal government is going to send people to jail for using the good old boy system, the contractors aren’t going to use it, they are going to use their legal departments.
    If DOD want procurement actions to go smoothly it’s actually quite easy. They can follow procurement law. Only problem is they have very little experience in working that way.

    Reply
  8. SMSgt Mac says:
    September 10, 2008 at 10:08 pm

    You don’t even have to read between the lines: just read to the end of the lines. The key point in today’s announcement concerning the inability to proceed is the point that the contract is trying to go forward “in this highly charged environment”.
    So dear fellows, we must ask ourselves what made it a ‘highly charged’ environment? You can look at anything that transpired on the government side after the issuance of the final RFP and you won’t find anything to ‘highly charge’ the situation. You can go down the litany of missteps the aquisition folks are alleged to have stumbled through and you won’t find anything that caused things to be ‘highly charged’. Similarly the mere filing of a protest by Boeing wouldn’t have neccessarily ‘highly charge’ anything.
    No, I submit the only thing that pulled the trigger that ‘highly charged’ the situation was the manner in which Boeing pursued its protest, and how Boeing brought the full weight of their political machine to bear from day one. (The speed at which Boeing moved in this direction still suggests premeditation to me: perhaps a plan B alternative for them as early as when they first anticipated or understood the essence of the final RFP.)
    As to whether this is merely more political cowardice on the part of the DoD or not, I will await the next RFP before passing judgement. If there are certain changes made from the previous one without significant technical or user need rationale to support them, we will KNOW that Boeing will have cowed the DoD and successfully subjugated the entire acquisition system just to ensure the taxpayers will keep subsidizing their business case.
    The possibility of good coming from this is extremely remote.

    Reply
  9. pfcem says:
    September 11, 2008 at 11:00 pm

    SMSgt Mac,
    As usuall you are FOS. Deliberately misrepresenting the facts & blaiming Boeing for everything that went wrong.
    What “caused” the ‘highly charged’ environment was Congress in its infinate wisdome (not) thinking it could fix the problems that occured during the tanker lease program by FORCING the USAF to conduct a “full & thorough competition” under INTENSE Congressional & DOD oversight when the USAF had already rejected the the A330 platform for not meeting its needs, being too risky, too expensive & TOO BIG. Everything which transpired was a direct result of that boneheaded act & Boeing not bending over backwards to take the blaim & be penalized more than it already had for the mistakes of the USAF & the DOD.
    The USAF then had the uneviable job of conducting a soliciation (under INTENSE Congressional & DOD oversight) in which both Boeing & EADS (partnered with NG) would compete. The NG/EADS team took full advantage of the DEMAND for a competition & knowing that it could not win under the criteria the USAF established got the criteria changed to accomodate their otherwise noncompetative KC-30, then threatened to pull its bid unless “further elaboration” was made.
    It wasn’t bad enough that the KC-X source selection team (NOT the USAF) did not assess the relative merits of the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation in selecting the KC-30, conducted misleading and unequal discussions with Boeing, et cetera but “leaked” that it was not even close. Then it delayed a week before debriefing Boeing on “why” the KC-30 had been selected & in that breifing it became clear. Boeing protested the selection of the KC-30 sighting prejudicial errors made by the KC-X source selection team. In one of, if not THE harshest rulings anyone can remember the GAO sustained the protest. The result being such a loss of confidence in the USAF that its selection authority was taken away & given directly to the ONE man who was responsible for ensuring that what did happen did not happen…
    What about all the changes made to & from the previous RFPs without significant technical or user need rationale to support them?

    Reply
  10. pfcem says:
    September 12, 2008 at 9:28 pm

    SMSgt Mac,
    Thanks once again for proving my point correct.

    Reply
  11. angel says:
    October 21, 2008 at 8:28 pm

    That’s OK!But take a closer look following link,It’s great to DVD and PSP converter for mac!
    DVD Ripper for Mac,
    Mac DVD Ripper Suite,
    Mac DVD Converter Ultimate Suite,
    Mac DVD Copy,
    Mac DVD Creator,
    Mac DVD to iPod Converter,
    Mac DVD to iPhone Converter,
    Mac DVD to MP4 Converter,
    Mac DVD to Apple TV Converter,
    Mac DVD to PSP Converter,
    Mac DVD to BlackBerry Converter,
    Mac DVD Audio Ripper,
    Edit DVD,
    Vob Converter for Mac,
    VOB to iPod Converter for Mac,
    VOB to Apple TV Converter for Mac,
    VOB to PSP Converter for Mac,
    VOB to MPEG4 Converter for Mac,
    VOB to M4V Converter for Mac,
    VOB to 3GP Converter for Mac,
    VOB to MPG Converter for Mac,
    VOB to AVI Converter for Mac

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    Recent Comments
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gees the price is on the roof already. Maybe we just...
      roland
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      I was the driver for BoB Gaygos, B Co 6/31st Commander....
      Ricky houltzhouser
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      Luis, I was Captain Gaydos, driver Sgt. Houltzhouser in...
      Ricky Houltzhouser
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
      If you really want to win the war permanently, it will...
      steven
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      Another question, how would I physically obstruct the...
      Curious
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      whats a good way to physically cover my laptop webcam?...
      Curious
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      But, the Eurotrash airplane ISN'T better… The Boeing...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gee, I wonder why? Oh! Maybe it's because the...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      It would also help, a LOT to 'limit' excess...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      And flush ALL those dollars already spent down the...
      WillyPete
  • 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| © 2010 Military Advantage