Over at DOD Buzz, my colleague Colin Clark reports that EADS has confirmed that it is looking at a possible independent bid for the KC-X tanker competition. A company press release cautions that the tanker RFP still favors “a smaller, less capable aircraft” and the larger EADS offering “may not be fully valued.” But EADS’ public statement does leave options open:
“Yesterday the US Department of Defense (DoD) indicated it would welcome a proposal from EADS North America as prime contractor for the KC-X tanker competition. This is a significant development. EADS is assessing this new situation to determine if the company can feasibly submit a responsive proposal to the Department’s request for proposal (RFP).”
– Greg
{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
Who cares, everyone, including EADS knows this tanker contract is a charade. There is no way Boeing will not win. None, Nil, Zero, Zip, Zilch. Just going through the legal motions, since taxpayers are supposed to get competition in projects. Neither company has a good track record lately when it comes to new jumbo jets, so might as well add a few more years to any buy schedule.
I’m all for them submitting their proposal…in hopes that they can choose the best one.
That said, it does seem that boeing has the odds.
Damn it! I thought this hole tanker BS was over with already… :(
Buy American!!!!
You must not be too bright, there is no such thing in a Global Economy. Have you been to Wal-Mart lately…EADS will bring more American jobs and also a newer airframe to the table than a 30 year old 767
Why take American when the foreign one is better? Enough of this political and buy American bullshit. Pick what's best and be done with it.
But, the Eurotrash airplane ISN'T better…
The Boeing meets the original Air Force requirements, and the EADS/ Northrup offering was nowhere near close, UNTIL McCain got in the act!
Yeah, I'd like to have Boeing to face some competition, but NOT at the cost of re-writing the contract requirements to favor the 'competitor' to the exclusion of Boeing!
Alright then good sir, fair enough. I just don't want to see our forces get a sub par plane just because its American instead of getting the better plane which might be foreign.
Please define what is "best". Boeings plane is cheaper and meets the mission requirements, is it best? Airbus' plane is larger and meets the requirements and can potentially deliver more fuel, but it costs a lot more per flight hour, does that make it best? Airbus can't fit in the hangers, Boeing can, does that make Boeing best? Not advocating either way, but don't use words like "best" out of context. For the stated needs of the USAF, a smaller plane is better. A good enough tanker that is good enough is better than a more expensive tanker. It is after all a Tanker!
Are you seriously advocating the purchase of RUSSIAN tanker aircraft because they might be a little cheaper?ARE U NUTS?
alabama a&p's need that contract, keep fightin'
Lockheed and Boeing: working both ends of a bent over taxpayer.
People should start going to prison over the ^&%^$ing bullsh!t that passes for military procurement.
It looks like a Russian firm may offer an Il-96 tanker plane:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/03/19/us.russia.re…
As an European living in Germany I would have love to see an Airbus 330 in USAF markings.
But the U. S. Forces (no, not the USAF Generals @ the Pentagon ) need the new Tanker now. Boeing won this time, let keep it so. I must say, the new KC-767 looks superb! :-)
Still EADS, Airbus and Eurocopter should team up with a other American companies like NG, LM, Bell or even Boeing for future joint projects like CH-53K, AH-72 or in decade later a successor to the C-5.
America and Europe should team up before the Chinese industry reaches our level.
"Let's move on, folks!"
Slán,
fightingirish
From a national security perspective we should do all we can to keep military hardware design and procurement in the US.
1000000pct.AGREE
Mike,
National Security, what planet you live on, it is a ONE WORLD ORDER now days…Global World we live in…Go to Wal-Mart and tell me how much you can Buy American? EADS will bring a manufacturing plant to Alabama and the USA, Cessna and our Kansas Elected delegation let 35 years worth of work go to China with the SKy Catcher… GO EADS and bring some work to the USA
The qty 60 Douglas Long Beach built KC-10's are superior to all the aircraft in question. Serviceability at most any decent sized commercial airport, off loads more gas and can do three at once as was demonstrated on the last KC-10A produced (fus 441).
Instead we have to deal with the monkey motion of the POS from Boeing and EADS…..amazing…
I agree to the statement above! From a National Security perspective we should do all we can to keep military hardware design and procurement in the US.
Anyone remember April 1986, the Libyan raid? The United States was denied overflight rights by France, Spain and Italy as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the Air Force portion of the operation to be flown around France, Spain and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles (2,100 km) each way and requiring multiple aerial refuelings.
History has a way of repeating itself! If for some reason down the road the Europeans have a disagreement with us on policies etc again, shut down the parts line or delay delivery it will hinder us big time! Can't refuel cargo planes, fighters, bombers, we're grounded! !
Also if EADS wanted to stay in the competition they should be offering a same size aircraft comparable to the 767 instead of trying to tell us what we need! Keep in mind going with a bigger aircraft comes with additional costs, ie; bigger hangers, bigger flight lines and runways, your limited to land at certain airfields, bigger support equipment and costs per flight hour will be more! So where is the savings and the best bang for the buck?? National Security should be 1st priority then everything else afterwards!
It is a 30 year old concept with the 767 maybe boeing should offer the 787 or 777. The Pacific ocean and Indian Ocean are far away, would be more comfortable in A330 or 777 than 30 year old 767 and at a higher cost of A330 Come on do what is best for the troops and taxpayer
fly4val,
The KC-10 is better than the KC-767 & KC-30 at what the KC-10 does but it is NOT better than the KC-767 at what the KC-135 does. There ARE reasons why the USAF has both medium (KC-135/KC-X/KC-Z) & large (KC-10/KC-Y) tankers.
***
fthomas,
Wrong, the 767s currently coming off the production line are just as new/modern as the A330s &/or 777s.
The 787 & 777 are too big & too expensive for KC-X, the 767 is just right (we could in fact do with something a bit smaller if there were not so much emphasis on airlift).