The question was "in all my years in the RAF that a) worked as it should from the start b) that cost what the agreed price was and c) was delivered on time."
So, yes, seriously, in RAF service (MoD leasing, crew training, introduction into service, MoD purchase etc) the C-17 fulfils these criteria. USAF experience - all prior to when the RAF got involved - is irrelevant.
Really?????? You seem to skirt over the ludicrous situation we signed up for under PFI
Royal Air Force
Boeing has marketed the C-17 to many European nations including Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom. The
Royal Air Force (RAF) has established an aim of having interoperability and some weapons and capabilities commonality with the USAF. The 1998
Strategic Defence Review identified a requirement for a strategic airlifter. The Short-Term Strategic Airlift (STSA) competition commenced in September of that year, however tendering was canceled in August 1999 with some bids identified by ministers as too expensive, including the Boeing/
BAe C-17 bid, and others unsuitable.
[71] The project continued, with the C-17 seen as the favorite.
[71] In the light of
Airbus A400M delays, the UK
Secretary of State for Defence,
Geoff Hoon, announced in May 2000 that the RAF would lease four C-17s at an annual cost of
£100 million from Boeing
[68] for an initial seven years with an optional two-year extension. The RAF had the option to buy or return the aircraft to Boeing. The UK committed to upgrading its C-17s in line with the USAF so that if they were returned, the USAF could adopt them.
The lease agreement restricted the operational use of the C-17s, meaning that the RAF could not use them for para-drop, airdrop, rough field, low-level operations and air to air refuelling.[72]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-17_Globemaster_III