I don't wish to appear pedantic, but;
BEagle; just let the products compete on their own merit and to hell with politics and governmental meddling.
Absolutely, old chap, can't say fairer than that! Show me a more successful project, in terms of aims acheived, than the RAF C-17, in the recent past.
Lybid; Surely the fact that the extended hours now being used by he C-17 just prove its usefulness. The expense must surely be down to the fact that the a/c were leased as a short term solution to a problem NOW. The cost now reflects the speed at which the implementation system (both training and supply) has been addressed.
"The An124 has delivered almost all the European military equipment into Bagram and Kabul.." just simply isn't true. Fact.
Another fact is that the C-17 is here, now, and has been doing the job to a level far above any body's expectations for many months. I believe that if we were to buy the things now, then the costs (long term) would reduce greatly.
Who would have bet the enourmous sum of money involved, on having aircraft delivered, and crews trained, within a year of our political masters making the descision to obtain them, with any other of the consortiums?
Surely the C-17 purchase price can be negotiable, after all, what better advert is there than for the 1st foreign user to BUY some, after such a relatively short period in service.