It looks like the longest running and possibly most controversial procurement process in US Air Force history has finally come to an end with Boeing being awarded the $35 billion contract to build the USAF’s next generation airborne refueling platform. Boeing is basing this on the 767 and the contract has given the 767 line a new lease on life with future maintenance tasks adding more icing on the cake.
As you will remember, the first round was won by Airbus who bid with their A330, an aircraft larger than the 767 and as such, better meeting the air forces’ requirement for general cargo capacity. Boeing attacked the decision and a protracted new round was initiated with Boeing being the winner this time.
Mobile, Alabama would have profited handsomely if Airbus were chosen as the European aircraft maker was planning to build the tankers there. This is now not going to happen.
Interestingly, defense analysts and even some lawmakers in the US were expecting Airbus to win this time also but the decision went the other way. Some say that with an ex-Boeing board member running the White House staff and the president having been helped to office by the aerospace giant the final decision could not be anything else but Boeing winning.
Whether or not this is true, I tend to agree with those who have said right from the start that a strategic asset like the tankers for the US Air Force should not come from anywhere else but the US. While from a commercial or even operational point of view an Airbus product may have its merits, having such a strategic asset being dependent on a foreign government (however friendly… ) is not a good idea.
We live in a strange world and the old cliché that “there are no permanent allies, no permanent enemies, only permanent interests” is as true as ever, NATO notwithstanding. At the end of the day, it is the interest of a nation that governs its behavior in a given situation and you don’t want to have anything so basic as the tanker in your war-fighting inventory to be grounded because of a dispute with another State over whether or not to go to war somewhere in the world. Sounds extreme? May be but I would hate having to try it.
One could argue about this decision back and force of course and we will probably never know what tipped the scale if indeed there was anything beyond the “objective” evaluation criteria. The important thing is that hopefully now the new tankers will get built and the venerable 707 derivates can start their well earned retirement.
Unless of course Airbus parent EADS appeals the decision. They have 10 days to make up their mind…
One correction if I may: The recent KC-X bidding process won by Boeing was round THREE, not round TWO. Boeing also won the FIRST round, for a while. Several people went to jail in the aftermath.