Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/02/24/boein ... anker-win/

Didn't know where to post this but thought it would be of interest.

Boeing Shocks With ‘Clear’ Tanker Win

By Colin Clark Thursday, February 24th, 2011 5:11 pm
Posted in Air, International, Policy

Boeing continued its dominance of the U.S. airborne tanker business, winning the $35 billion contract to build 179 KC-X tankers, one of the biggest defense contracts in the next decade. The award shocked experienced observers who had predicted a big win for EADS NA. Word came from a Pentagon email announcing the initial $3.5 billion contract.

F-16.net Sponsor

Interesting that Boeing appears to have won this contract on fuel economy (especially with oil prices on the rise again). I'll confess to being a fan of the the KC-45 back when E.A.D.S. was partnered with Northop Grumman, but I'm hopeful this is the end of it and they just start building tankers now! I'm keeping my fingers crossed this doesn't get botched up a third (?) time with a protest from E.A.D.S.

USAF needs reliable, operational tankers now (operational in next 6-10 yrs). US taxpayers (USAF procurement budgets) need the best mid-term deal possible.

Reconsider a 150 total airframe split-LEASE (75 units each), via 15 yr lease term, maximizing airframes delivered to USAF in the near-term. In 2025-2030, go from there... things may change and USAF will have better flexibility to adjust as a bonus. imho...

And according to Boeing official statements at least... for them this contract is reportedly not a 'needle mover' going either way, so any such renegotiated 'Split Lease' should not harm them accordingly.

p.s., thread to Modern mil Forum?

Have you bought a car lately and compared it to leasing? We don't call it fleecing for nothing.

In order for the manufacturer to offer a lease on good terms, it has to know that you will either buy the vehicle at the end of the lease (at inflated prices) or that they can sell it on the used vehicle market. Neither of these would work for 150 used tankers therefore neither Boeing nor EADS would offer good lease prices.

Thread already reported for movement.

BOING PROMO VIDEO:

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com/2011/ ... r-win.html

Why only 175 airframes? That is less than 1/2 of our current fleet.

sewerrat wrote:

Why only 175 airframes? That is less than 1/2 of our current fleet.

Replacing KC-135s not KC-10s?

Correct. This should give you an idea of what KC-X/Y/Z covers and when.

Spud:

Those kind of graphics are depressing.

I'll be dead in 2051.

OL

You and me both Wink

Quote:

Geogen
USAF needs reliable, operational tankers now (operational in next 6-10 yrs). US taxpayers (USAF procurement budgets) need the best mid-term deal possible.

Reconsider a 150 total airframe split-LEASE (75 units each), via 15 yr lease term, maximizing airframes delivered to USAF in the near-term. In 2025-2030, go from there...

Agree wholeheartedly that the U.S.A.F. needs it's KC-135 Stratotanker's replaced sooner rather than later Geogen but I'm not convinced a lease is the way to do it (and I'm glad they didn't go with a split buy which would have been even worse). But I see SpudmanWP already covered that better than I could.
Thanks for the graph and other info Spudman and thanks for the link to the Boeing video Spazinbad (gotta see if that makes it's way to YouTube).

Not sure if it's been noted yet, but it would appear it's being designated the KC-46A.

KC-46A actually.

I tended to favor the Airbus, if only to send a message to U.S. defense contractors to quit milking development projects for decades on end, but I don't care what they pick anymore. Just PLEASE GOD... LET THIS BE THE END OF THE ISSUE. This tanker buy fight has gone on long enough.

EADS decides NOT to contest the latest award.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/03/04/353951/eads-concedes-kc-x-contract-award-to-boeing.html

Now let's get on with it already!!!

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

BOEING WINS KC-X BID