One message is clear from this thread, and I find it troubling. I, like most on here, take people who speak with obvious understanding of a given subject at their word and whilst I might not agree, it is usually pretty clear who is speaking from a genuine position of knowledge and who is talking flannel.
The troubling part here is that those who are clearly "in the know" by virtue of experience, and/or direct involvement with either or both companies seem to be in agreement on two points;
1. The KC-767 does not yet exist as a platform. Various guises exist with limited functionality available which falls way below the requirements of KC-X, but the the KC-767A is not a qualified aircraft and is years behind schedule.
2. Boeing will win KC-X.
I recently attended a conference on the subject where one speaker made a flippant remark that the GAO criticized the DoD after the last failed attempt at running this competition for failing to include the clause in the RFP that "Boeing must win". Good joke.. or was it??
I see dark clouds ahead.