So? The KC-45A is not based on the A330-200F, which is a A330-200 with improved container/pallet handling - while handy for commercial operators has less military application
The KC-45A is based on the A330-200, which has been flying since 1998.
The KC-30B tanker has been flying since June 2007
And KC-30-D1, the first aircraft for the USAF contract flew in September 2007.
All these variants are practically identical
OTOH the Boeing offer, the KC767AT, is a bitzer with subsemblies from various 767 versions, which not only hasn't flown, Boeing hasn't even started to see how the bits will fit together.
“The KC-45A is based on the A330-200, which has been flying since 1998.”
Hi Oztrich, it’s based on the A330-200F (Freighter) which has not flown. This new model is shorter, has a larger wing and taller vertical stab. Heavy use of comoposties of course. Look it up on their web site. I do have a problem with Composites especially in the Vertical Stab of Airbus aircraft. I also feel comforatble saying the Airframe of the Boeing product is proven in the UPS fleet and will prove much stronger. The Air Froce has been ruining airframes with heavy loads in recent years and doesn’t seem interested in durability vs payload tradeoffs.
The Air Force changed the runway length requirements and several other requirements(see my last link) at the last minute and Boeing offered the modified 767 with a larger wing for shorter takeoff distance. Why they didn’t propose the 777 is the real question to ask Boeing and the Air Force. If the Air Force is concerned about flying people and material accross the Pacific then the 777 is tailor made.
“It also forces the European aircraft builder to make good its commitment to shift assembly of the tankers and all A330-200F cargo aircraft to Mobile, Ala.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=comm&id=news/TANK03038.xml
“The competition winner, Northrop Grumman/EADS North America, plans to select a contractor within the next month to break ground on new facilities in Mobile, Ala., for final assembly of the KC-45 and A330-200F.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/aw031008p2.xml
I’ve read that it’s a million square foot facility. Don’t think the will finish that by next summer. Then there’s the question of where the assemblers and related Engineering specialists will come from...
“Boeing conducted an internal study, with input from retired generals, into which airframe to propose. Among the candidates was the larger, more modern 777. Albaugh says the company was “discouraged” from offering the 777.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/aw031008p2.xml
“”””About 16 months ago, the Air Force withdrew its tanker request-for-proposals — which included capabilities such as cargo, passengers and add-on mission like signals intelligence — to refocus it on the basic A-model task of in-flight refueling so that the primary mission would not be compromised.
When Northrop threatened to pull out of the competition altogether, U.S. officials again changed the competition to add features - including extra credit for cargo and passenger carrying capabilities that aren’t required for the refueling mission.””””
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/PAC03048.xml
Like I said, pie in the sky. Lawsuit time...