Look it up yourself. I suggest you start by comparing the planned in service date in the tanker role with the AMI’s latest estimate.
You might then look at the aerodynamic problems with the pod and pod pylon, and at the inordinate amount of time it has taken to come up with a fix that is crude and unduly draggy.
You might then chat to any of the AMI tanker force about their impression of the mission system software…..
None of this is insoluble. Not much of it is even terribly serious, but it does put overblown claims of Boeing’s “more tanker performance metrics of every tanker mission done in the last 50 years than god” in context.
In any case, we don’t need to get mired in detail. The inferred claim was that Boeing’s tanker heritage would give it an edge in producing a better tanker, quicker. It clearly has done neither.
The A310 and A330 are superior tankers to the 767 in all key metrics.
The Germans have flown tanker A310s. No-one has flown op 767 tanker missions.
It’s hard not to conclude that the Airbus MRTT is better and quicker.
Can you name a military aircraft recently that met its initial inservice date?
Sign In
