US Airforce new tanker 1

[Benbarca7]

The U.S. Air Force announced Thursday that it has selected Boeing’s NewGen Tanker to be its new KC-46A air refueling jet.

It will be based on the B767.
it was in concurrence with the A330 of Airbus.

The contract is about 35 billions dollar.

What do you guys think of it?
Do you think Boeing should have win?
I heard that the Airbus aircraft was better.

will it create a lot of job?
A lot of new projects are coming for Boeing.


Ben
Nacelle Stress Engineer (repair on Civil Aircraft)

 

[IRstuff]

This subject has already been discussed a few things, here. I can't the relevant threads, but they're around.

TTFN

FAQ731-376
Chinese prisoner wins Nobel Peace Prize

 

[MikeHalloran]

I say it's about damn time that we got _something_ to replace the decrepit tanker fleet.

Maybe in another ten years we'll get something to replace the Space Shuttles...



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[Benbarca7]

Oops sorry for making a double.
thanks IRstuff, I'll try to find the previous thread.

lol mike!

Ben
Nacelle Stress Engineer (repair on Civil Aircraft)

 

[WKTaylor]

BenBarca7

USAF outbriefing to both competitors will give details that will bolster or kill the case for the Boeing Tanker.

The contract award outbriefing in 2008 [when the EADS aircraft won the contract last time] was filled with inconsistencies ... which indicated that EADS acft failed to meet contract and/or spec minimums... but the USAF gave them a "pass".

Regards, Wil Taylor

Trust - But Verify!

We believe to be true what we prefer to be true.

For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible.

 

[thruthefence]

aren't the Australians flying the airbus tanker now, or is that something different?

 

[KENAT]

The Airbus tanker is in, or nearly in service with RAAF & RAF amongst others.

The Boeing offering is more of a 'paper aeroplane' last I heard. The Japanese 767 tanker was based on a different model and had all kinds of trouble.

While there were irregularities, from what little I know about it I'm inclined to think the Airbus was potentially the better solution.

A330, is newer than 767. 767 is virtually reaching the end of it's life. With the stratotanker, it was a brand spanking new design, more akin to if Boings solution had been 787 based (although, it wasn't actually as closely related to the 707 as it initially looked).

Either way there's a good chance the Military tanker will be in service long after most of it's civilian equivalents have been replaced, with all that implies for maintenance. 767 will probably hit that hurdle before the A330 though.

My understanding was that the KC10 had significant advantages over the KC135 because of it's larger size and payload and the fact it's a wide body. 767 isn't a true wide body as I understand it while A330 is a true wide body (dual standard containers in the belly). Of course, there are a few runways the larger aircraft can't use.

I'm sure a lot of it was based on the US V European (or as it's enemies like to call it 'French') company. Especially as EADS no longer had Lockheed leading the bid.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[rb1957]

i'd agree (with the traditional US vs the rest), except for the b@lls the USAF showed awarding the contract initially to EADS.

mind you we're hearing now the EADS initially out-priced Boeing (or did Boeing out-gouge EADS ?).

so maybe all this saved the US taxpayer some money ... ya'think ?

 

[Benbarca7]

Is this the LAST decision or can Airbus appeal again?

Ben
Nacelle Stress Engineer (repair on Civil Aircraft)

 

[MikeHalloran]

Hey, it's USA politics. There ain't no LAST decision.


Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[PHovnanian]

It will be interesting to see how much redesign work Boeing will put into the B767 airframe to support this. On the one hand, the existing 767 is at the end of its life. Boeing admitted that, had this contract been lost, the line would probably be discontinued. But Boeing doesn't have the engineering skills left to do much in the way of a new design. Witness the 787 fiasco. Most of that was due to Boeing pushing engineering tasks out the door, often to foreign firms at the expense of its in-house staff.

 

[plasgears]

The B767 is a wide body with twin aisles. Any new application of the type will have accummulated the benefits of continuous improvement. What is good for Boeing is good for the country. The US Congress should consider that the Airbus technology was largely immitative of US models. That includes engines, also. My GE patents were sold to Airbus/SNECMA at the outset of the Airbus program. A study of modern engine cross sections shows a family resemblance reaching back to early American Airbus engines.

 

[rb1957]

"Airbus technology was largely immitative of US models" ... maybe for engines (how many manufacturers of large engines anyways ?), but not for structures ... they've always had very different approaches, often attributed to the higher labour skill in europe.

 

[Benbarca7]

Airbus would also have been good for the country I think as they would have created a lot of job here (building a FAL, they have an engineering center here and would have a lot of american partners).

Ben
Nacelle Stress Engineer (repair on Civil Aircraft)

 

[rb1957]

surely the jobs argument is nationally pretty neutral ... the work would be done on shore, the only difference is where on shore (ie which state).

question ... is it ironic (moronic ?) to replace an obsolete airpalne with an obsolescent one ? ok, the plane's a flying gas tank, and it'll have updated systems and be a new build airframe ... some (most?) of those KC135s are older than most of the people in the office ('cept me) and obviously need a lot of upkeep (like me !)

 

[rotorblade]

"A study of modern engine cross sections shows a family resemblance reaching back to early American Airbus engines." - plasgears, what exactly do you mean by resemblance, and what is it that you expect to see so much different than before, especially on a turbofan engine cross-section?

Thanks in advance for the details.

Cheers,

rotorblade

 

[IRstuff]

Both bids in the previous round included substantial off-shore content; basically, only final assembly would have been done in the US.

TTFN

FAQ731-376
Chinese prisoner wins Nobel Peace Prize

 

[KENAT]

The idea of the Boeing 767 being an American plane always made me chuckle.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[plasgears]

rotorblade,
Compressor diffuser, fuel tubes, turbine stator air cooling, deletion of mid support on core engine, etc, are all evident on modern engines. These are not generic details.

 

[rotorblade]

ok, and I'm still wondering how you're going to link the resemblences on engine technologies as evidence to a european airframe manufacturer being immitative of US models. since when do the airframers build aero engines?

cheers,

rotorblade