For your information, the KC-10 is a strategic tanker that operates out of the airfields already available for strategic purposes. It was never expected to go into primarily tactical theaters. The KC-X has to be more flexible and tactically capable to go further into harms way. The KC-10 is perfect for its missions. But it is essentially one that is limited. There are approx. fifty or so KC-135s for every KC-10 in the fleet.
Mr. Ross also refers to an editorial in the Air Force Association’s magazine as claiming they don’t like the EADS tanker either. When you read the editorial, you do not find anything like it.
No, that was cited for a more limited point. I.e., you get a real sense of the concern for the warfighter's concerns, rather than arbitrary standards and rules. They explicitly want "booms in the air" not mythically "on station". They want them forward deployable...not a thousand miles out of useable range.
You have greater patience than me, sir.
How you maintain such tolerance for irrational bias is a testament to your professionalism.
No matter the weight of the argument in favor of GAO, no matter the merits of the GAO decision, no matter the emerging proof of a flawed and unequal Air Force process, some cling to their anti-Boeing biases.
Further, more and more advocates who examine closely the issue are coming to defense of OMB and Boeing. Of course, according to some, Boeing bought them off. Boeing may have deep pockets, but they are not that deep.
Loren Thompson, a highly respected Lexington Institute member and CEO, initially sided with the Air Force, but when he actually met with Air Force officials, as well as NG/EADS and Boeing personnel, he changed his mind and now seems how flawed the Air Force decision was—and is not at all pleased. Of course, some will insist he was “bought off” as well. Loren? Please.
PBS had an interview the other day with Peter Spiegel of the LA Times. Hardly a pro-Boeing organization. Spiegel lays out nicely how the Air Force made errors and did not follow their own rules.
Some have an irrational mind-set that actually believes Boeing is some sort of powerful Leviathan in DC, making the government and military do their bidding, but yet, as said before, if they had that sort of influence, the whole thing would have been over a long time ago. Additionally, Boeing would have won the JSF, the F-22 bid, the UCAS bid, would not be worried about the NGLRB, etc.
If Boeing was as influential as some believe, they would never lose a bid.
When the full report is released the same people arguing against the OMB will not be swayed, no matter the depth of proof, or the lack of integrity of the Air Force process.
Good luck fighting the good fight.