Very good information. Thanks.
Boeing proposed the KC-767 derived from the Boeing 767. It is used by Italy and Japan already as a tanker.
The Northrup proposal has been selected, as stated in this article.
Was there any reason for not considering the C-17 beyond that the Fighter Pilot Mafia wants to steal C-17 funding for the F-22?
Loern Thompson is an excellent (if not the best) defense industry analyst.
Sometime there are variables that are considered that are not obvious or public. I imagine the risk associated with a single source supplier is fairly large, and for the DoD keeping Northrup Grumman as major player in the game might sound appealing. Boeing is in the realm of large jets pretty much the only show left in town and if NG looses this deal they too fade from the picture. -IMHO
Another consideration is that ultimately airframes intended for the civilian domestic or international markets may be built there. Not only do you have the USAF being supplied, but possibly Australia and others. The US is a highly competitive location for production.
In the end, it's NG that is the system integrator and assembly will be in the US, many of the subcomponents on an Airbus even built in Europe are North American anyhow. The big gripe I would have had, is if this plane were built in Europe. I'm all for free trade, but national security/defense related industry should not be off-shored. Furthermore, those who over years have benefited from protectionism and subsidies keeping US goods and services off their market should not be rewarded with US tax money.
Go Northrop! I hope this is just the beginning of the “wins”!
I have to wonder if Boeing having moved its headquarters away from its manufacturing facilities several years back had something to do with their becoming as out of touch as they were on this project.