KC-46A USAF Aerial Tanker: From KC-X RFPs to Decision and Execution

DOT&E: KC-46A test schedule & promises “not executable”; USAF disagrees. (Jan 19/12)

DID’s FOCUS articles cover major weapons acquisition programs – and no program is more important to the USAF than its bid to replace its aerial tanker fleet. In January 2007, the big question was whether there would be a competition for the USA’s KC-X proposal, covering 175 production aircraft and 4 test platforms. The total cost for this first phase alone will exceed $25 billion, but America’s aerial tanker fleet demands new planes to replace its KC-135s, whose most recent new delivery was in 1965. Otherwise, unpredictable age or fatigue issues, like the ones that grounded its F-15A-D fighters in 2008, could ground its aerial tankers – and with them, a substantial slice of the USA’s total airpower.

KC-Y and KC-Z contracts may follow in subsequent decades, in order to replace all 530 (195 active; ANG 251; Reserve 84) active tankers, as well as the USAF’s 59 heavy KC-10 tankers that were delivered from 1979-1987. Then again, fiscal and demographic realities may mean that the 179 plane KC-X buy is it for the USAF. Either way, the stakes were huge for all concerned.

In the end, it was Team Boeing’s KC-767 NexGen/ KC-46A (767 derivative) vs. EADS North America’s KC-45A (Airbus KC-30/A330-200 derivative), both within the Pentagon and in the halls of Congress. The financial and employment stakes guaranteed a huge political fight no matter which side won. A fight that ended up sinking, and restarting, the entire program, after Airbus won in February 2008. Three years later, Boeing won the recompete:

• KC-X: The Story So Far
• KC-X: Teams & Locations
• KC-X RFP: Contracts & Key Developments [updated]
• Appendix A: KC-X RFP v2.0 – The New Structure
• Appendix B: The Contenders and The Cargo Factor – KC-30B, KC-767… KC-777?
• Appendix C: Additional Readings

Displaying 305 of 28,834 words (about 73 pages)

---