Originally Posted by
Just This Once...
...since the 787.
It would perhaps not be too surprising that many of the managers from the 787 transitioned to 767-2C/KC-46 early in the program
I've posted before that in my nearly 40 years at the lazy B, the 767-2C/KC-46 is by far the worst managed program I've been involved with (no, I wasn't on the 787 program - the only other program in the same ballpark of screw-up). Quite a come down from the 777, that certified on the very day that had been scheduled 5 years before hand, while meeting or exceeding nearly every performance metric for the new aircraft.
Boeing did a major shakeup of the 767-2C/KC-46 about 18 months ago (not entirely coincidental, about the time of first flight), and the program has progressed much better since then. This latest round of problems is more along the line of "
happens" rather than the piss poor design decisions made early on that resulted in tanker fuel systems that leaked like a sieve and wire design that failed to meet basic wiring requirements.
As to why the 787 and tanker programs got so fouled up - ask yourself what major change occurred at Boeing between when the 777 certified (1995) and when the 787 launched