Ok I have a question...Why if we originally built KC-135s and KC-10s why can’t we just use those molds and make some more. I mean if the United States Taxpayer paid for these airplanes once why can’t we do it again...I mean we do own these molds...don’t we?
nice thought, but with very few exceptions, aircraft are not made from “molds” but I think you may have hit on an idea there.
I'm sure that Chevrolet owns the molds for '55 Bel-Aires, but they're not going to simply just crank out more whenever they feel like it.
KC-135s haven't been built since the 1960s. KC-10s the 1980s.
This KC-X competition was supposed to take an off-the-shelf airliner airframe and modify it for the tanker role, which in theory should have been much easier, cheaper, and faster than trying to restart production on a 50 year old airframe.
Unfortunately, whenever the Pentagon buys a new something, they go overboard with the "it's also gotta have..."-itis, cramming so much new technology into the airframe that it takes years to figure it all out.
If all you want is a simple tanker, both the KC-767 and the KC-30 are ready today. If you want a boom that must deliver x amount more fuel then the existing models, then we get this long drawn out competition that is in its third iteration.
Someone with more background than I should weigh in regarding the specs of the KC-10, KC-135 and KC-X, but I suspect that in the design universe of payload-speed-range, the KC-X is asking for more than either of the previous designs could deliver. I'm good with that concept. The USAF should have the best idea of what kind of tanker they need in the 21st century.
The bigger problem is twofold. First, USAF has totally screwed the pooch in its attempts to award a contract. I've seen it done badly any number of times, but I've never seen it done this badly and this consistently for a given procurement. Second, this ENTIRE procurement is about politics and lying to the American people. The morning drive in the DC area is an amazing experience. In addition to the madness on the highways, we get radio ads for government procurement. Computer services, ships, and aircraft are hawked like they were just the most normal thing to be spending your money on, don't you know. Lately, the Boeing ads have been incredible half-truths and apples v. bananas comparisons between their design and the EADS plane. Whether the subject is the percentage of American content, whether Americans or foreigners will be building the plane, or any other topic - the fact that Boeing is now a Chicago-based company is pretty obvious. About the only thing they haven't done is to publicly threaten to kneecap someone. As an example (and I don't have the current figures), most Americans are probably not aware that in the original proposals the EADS plane would have had more American content and American labor hours than the Boeing plane, and OBTW, it carried more fuel to dispense to its fighter-customers.