09 May 2025, 13:43 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 03 Jan 2015, 02:22 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 12130 Post Likes: +3031 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: At the time, there was a Boeing Exec said the new RFP was much better for the AF.
Tim
Just noting, that the Boeing Exec stated this after the protest was upheld; the new RFP released, but proposals not yet due. So no contract was awarded, and most pundits expected Airbus to win again.
Tim
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 03 Jan 2015, 02:47 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/22/12 Posts: 2817 Post Likes: +2773 Company: Retired Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The evaluation criteria defined in the RFP were not followed. Result is that the AF had to at least redo the bid and evaluation process. Yah, basically the AF told Boeing it would score the contest one way, then scored it differently. It's as if at the end of the World Series the win was awarded not to the team that won the most games but to the team that scored the most points. Here's the GAO press release: http://www.gao.gov/press/press-boeing2008jun18_3.pdf (The full, 69-page report was not made public as it contained proprietary information so this is the most authoritative source.) Point 1 is, "The Air Force, in making the award decision, did not assess the relative merits of the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation". Addressing Ben's original point, Points 6 & 7 note that the AF, when confronted, "conceded that it made a number of errors in evaluation that, when corrected, result in Boeing displacing Northrop Grumman as the offeror with the lowest most probable life cycle cost". So the smaller 767 was in fact cheaper than the larger 330.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 03 Jan 2015, 03:22 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/22/12 Posts: 2817 Post Likes: +2773 Company: Retired Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
The fundamental problem was that after the original sole-source fiasco the AF desperately needed a public competition but by this time Airbus and Boeing knew each other's positions so well that upon reading any RFP they both knew who would win and the other would drop out, ruining the AF's contest. The RFP ultimately favored the smaller, cheaper 767 so to keep Airbus in the game the AF secretly tilted the evaluation criteria in their favor while lying to Boeing to keep them from dropping out. That dishonesty and unfairness is why the GAO upheld Boeing's protest. On the bright side, it pushed Boeing to squeeze their (fixed-price) bid even harder to beat Airbus so the AF is getting the plane at a rock-bottom price. Boeing's in the hole on the project now by over a billion, although they claim that over time they'll drive production costs low enough to eke out a profit. Time will tell.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 24 Sep 2019, 15:21 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/30/18 Posts: 2465 Post Likes: +2160 Location: NH
Aircraft: F33A, 757/767
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm embarrassed to say I wasn't up on the KC-46... But some recent FB notifications have brought it to my attention. so it's still 3-4 years out? Jesus.
Then I didn't know about the KC-25... Wow. 3-4 years out from what? My local ANG base got rid of all their -135's earlier this year, and got their first -46 last month and have been doing plenty of training flights with them.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 24 Sep 2019, 15:28 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/30/18 Posts: 2465 Post Likes: +2160 Location: NH
Aircraft: F33A, 757/767
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Well then I was misinformed. I'm not sure if the -46 has been deployed yet, that might be a little ways off, but they are being flown by operational units.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 25 Sep 2019, 01:47 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 06/17/14 Posts: 5852 Post Likes: +2628 Location: KJYO
Aircraft: C-182, GA-7
|
|
...caution wake turbulence...
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 25 Sep 2019, 08:49 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/29/17 Posts: 1864 Post Likes: +4531 Location: Freedom NH
Aircraft: Club Archer
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Related question...
Could someone shed some light on why the Navy and Air Force use two different refueling technologies?
The drogue approach seems simpler for the tanker and allows a larger number of airplanes to be tankers (F18s, C130s, etc).
What’s the benefit of the Air Force boom approach? Are the larger planes (cargo and bombers) just incapable of maneuvering enough to plug into a drogue?
Robert Volume and speed - If you have to fill up a SAC B-52, which was the driver behind the technology, the flying boom can move a whole lot of fuel faster. When we tanked off a KC-135 with a drogue on you had to make sure the crew was only using one pump or it could over pressurize the system. That was mostly back when USN/USMC tanking off big win tankers was not the norm, now the whole procedure is mostly seamless. Circa 89 the USAF was aghast that we did all tanking with no comms. They were very structured and SAC-like but we've adapted well to the purple world.
_________________ “A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.” Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 25 Sep 2019, 18:57 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 08/23/11 Posts: 2270 Post Likes: +2411 Company: Delta/ check o'the month club Location: Meridian, ID (KEUL)
Aircraft: 1968 Bonanza 36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Volume and speed - If you have to fill up a SAC B-52, which was the driver behind the technology, the flying boom can move a whole lot of fuel faster.
When we tanked off a KC-135 with a drogue on you had to make sure the crew was only using one pump or it could over pressurize the system. That was mostly back when USN/USMC tanking off big win tankers was not the norm, now the whole procedure is mostly seamless. Circa 89 the USAF was aghast that we did all tanking with no comms. They were very structured and SAC-like but we've adapted well to the purple world. I don't do any comm anymore - if the booms down, I go in. That's how we've always done it in combat so fight like you train right? I will shoot the bull with them sometimes 
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: First fly Boeing KC-46A Pegasus Posted: 25 Sep 2019, 19:09 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/29/17 Posts: 1864 Post Likes: +4531 Location: Freedom NH
Aircraft: Club Archer
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don't do any comm anymore - if the booms down, I go in. That's how we've always done it in combat so fight like you train right? I will shoot the bull with them sometimes  Yep, by Desert Storm it was all no comms. Chatting with them was reserved for Trivial Pursuit on TranLants/TransPacs. 
_________________ “A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.” Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|