KC-X old stuff / flamewar

Here’s a place where we can rehash old stuff about KC-X ad nauseum without distracting people who only care about new developments

The USAF has ALWAYS preferred the 767.
Round 1: The Airbus/EADS KC-330 was rejected for no meeting the requirements.

not particularly relevant, KC-30 didn’t have a boom then. It does now

As an example, IFARA was not even a part of the early draft RFP but was a concession added to satisfy NG/EADS (which HAD to have the model data altered in order for the KC-30 to even complete the evaluation missions).

And evaluating IFARA was a GOOD decision as it added more sophisticated analysis of how the different attributes would impact REAL WORLD ops

I could go on & on & on but basically it is clear from the RFP from ALL THREE ROUNDS that the 767 is preferred

your cute little story falls apart in round 2

if both the RFP and the AF favored KC-767, how in the world did KC-30 win?

things that make you go hmmm. . .

As far as round 3, round 2 demonstrated to the AF that politically if they wanted ‘something’, that something had better be ‘Boeing’

and as the AF does want ‘something’, they have no choice really

round 1: KC-30 didn’t have a boom and wasn’t relevant
round 2: KC-30 convinced the AF it was a BETTER TANKER
round 3: AF decides it doesn’t matter if KC-30 is better, they have to go Boeing if they want anything