1) The 767 line obviously was still open. It was low risk, easily engineered, and viable to meet what was billed as the requested mission and performance parameters.
2) Otherwise, the 777, as large as the Airbus model, and as expensive would have been sent for consideration.
2) Instead the proposal and all the signals asked for the price and performance of the 767.
3) And —> EADS/Airbus/Europe signaled in 2007 that they could not meet the competitive pricing of Boeing and that they would likely not even bid.
http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2007/01/22/afx3348605.html
4) And what changed was a reward to Britain and France by Bush to build large components like the wings of the airframe and what changed was a reward to crony politicians.
5) So now taxpayers will foot the bill for Airbus to get guaranteed sales, to lower their capex requirements, to build a plant at getter synergy for not merely the military aspect but also the commercial line of freighter airframes. We just gave competitive advantage to a subsidized European company against Boeing.
6) Shelby got on cable news and said that Boeing presented an inferior product—a partisan politician trashed a US company for a net lose in jobs and for Airbus. The results of the bidding process calling Boeing “high risk” and missing the performance requirements was nonsense. Boeing had the 777 tanker. American engineering and manufacturing and logistics is the best in the world! So check your facts.
The 767 line was going to be shut down so they can start building the 787 Dreamliner. Boeing wanted the contract so they can make a few billion more dollars off a line that’s already been paid for.
The 777 wasn’t offered because Boeing is still making money off of the commercial sales of that aircraft.
The wings for the KC-45 are going to be made by Vought Aircraft Industries in Nashville and GKN Aerospace in Alabama.
Boeing DOES NOT have a 777 tanker beyond a few artists concept paintings, they are still making a profit off of it’s commercial sales and had no desire or excess production capability to even offer a tanker version.
A tanker would require a freighter version of the 777, which BTW is still on the drawing board.
Boeing can not even deliver the KC-767 tankers ordered by Japan and Italy on time especially to Italy because theirs are 2 years late.
http://www.leeham.net/filelib/ScottsColumn052907.pdf
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/military/read.main/80767/
I am so furious about this that I may not vote for any Repubs this year.