Tanker RFP Released

The Presolicitation Notice for the KC-X Tanker Modernization Program is online.

I think that one of the crucial changes in this process has been the death of John Murtha, which makes his likely successor on the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee is Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Boeing WA) so the EADS/Northrup-Grumman team is in a much weaker position.

Murtha appeared fairly agnostic on the tanker choice, he just wanted it done now, but Dicks is clearly going to make things difficult for anything that does not go Boeing's way.

Northrop Grumman has been threatening to no bid the RFP, but the basic form of the RFP remains much the same as earlier drafts, in that there is little in the way of consideration for additional capacity, which would be the A330's strong suit, as it is a larger and more capable aircraft than the 767. (also here)

Gates is still "Very Hopeful" about getting two bids, but I'm not so sure.

I will note that it appears that the impetus for not bidding is coming from Northrop, not EADS, which still appears to be
Seems to come from NG, not EADS.

Most notably, the CEO of NG has explicitly said that their policy would be to pursue profits, and not markets or market share.

Still, this might not prevent a bid, if, as Stephen Trimble observes, EADS wants to go it along:

In the absence of a Northrop-led proposal, what would stop EADS North America from submitting its own bid for the KC-X deal?

I can think of reasons why they would. If price is such a factor in the competition, cutting out the US flag bearer and bringing systems integration in-house might save some money. EADS NA has demonstrated it can win an aircraft contract from the US military. The 100th UH-72 Lakota for the US Army rolls off the assembly line in Mississippi next week. The company believes its solid performance on LUH allows it to compete on fair terms with American-owned companies for other Pentagon contracts.

On the other hand, there's no question EADS' chances of victory are smaller without Northrop's help. Northrop has powerful friends on Capitol Hill and a long relationship with the customer. Moreover, as long as fuel offload requirements for the next tanker are modeled on the KC-135R, the KC-45 is going to be disadvantaged against a smaller aircraft like the Boeing 767. And let's be honest: The UH-72, despite its success, is not a widebody tanker; it's a civilian airspace-only light utility helicopter.

An EADS only bid is better for EADS, and for the taxpayer, but not for lobbyists or Congresscritter's campaign war chests, which is why they teamed with NG in the first place, because if you don't pay off legislators and lobbyists, you don't get the bid.

One of the more interesting pieces of information here is the schedule, which looks to a first flight in 2012, and service entry in 2017.

Honestly, I do not see Boeing meeting this schedule, given their generally poor record with 767 tankers for the Japan and Italy, which were significantly behind schedule.

PDF of RFP PowerPoint after the break.


Tanker RFP Final Power Point