KC-X RFP Mk II (merged)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Whilst mistakes can happen this does seem rather suspicious
EADS Won't Rule Out Protest Over Tanker Mistake
..........Some analysts and journalists are wondering whether the mixup will force the Air Force and Pentagon officials to split their tanker purchase between the two bidders.
O'Keefe neither endorsed nor objected to the Air Force buying EADS as well as Boeing tankers, saying that his company is ready to respond to whatever the service decides it needs to do.
"There have been a number of acquisition scenarios put forward over the last several years, split buy being one approach that is appealing to some," EADS spokesman Jamie Darcy said in a statement sent to reporters about two hours later.................
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hants
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It just keeps on going..........
latest,
KC-X competition delayed as evaluation process roiled by politics, USAF errors
latest,
KC-X competition delayed as evaluation process roiled by politics, USAF errors
Maybe a reduced KC-X buy is being "set up" by this apparent gaff, so they buy only a few to replace the reeeeally knackered 135s and KC10s - then roll on for a full order of MQ-L?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US military sidelines officials over tanker error
Well at least they could of been a little more subtle and left the documents on the back seat of car or on a train...like we do in this country...See Here
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Angels 20 and climbing
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More KC-X analysis here...
"Indiana Jones and the Quest for KC-X tankers"
Indiana Jones and the Quest for KC-X tankers | Aerospace Insight
"Indiana Jones and the Quest for KC-X tankers"
Indiana Jones and the Quest for KC-X tankers | Aerospace Insight
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
EADS poised to win Air Force tanker contest, analyst says
al.com Monday, December 06, 2010
The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. will win the U.S. Air Force tanker contract over rival Boeing Co., according to a leading defense analyst.
Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said EADS has emerged as the clear favorite for the coveted deal, based on the Air Force's internal analysis of the two competing bids.
"Boeing has lost this competition," Thompson said, citing conversations with Boeing executives. "The only question now is whether they choose to protest the award, and I'm not sure they will."
Neither Boeing nor EADS would comment Sunday.
The Air Force said it expects to announce a winner for the potential $40 billion contract as early as next month. Chicago-based Boeing and EADS, the parent company of Airbus, are vying for the lucrative work to build 179 jet tankers for the Air Force.
It's the second round of competition between the American and European defense giants in a contest marked by fierce political fighting and prodigious marketing campaigns.
The battle has big stakes in Mobile. EADS has said that, if successful, it plans to assemble its KC-30 tankers at a $600 million, 1,500-worker factory to be constructed at Brookley Field.
Boeing has proposed to assemble its KC-767 tankers on its existing commercial assembly lines in Everett, Wash., and modify them for the military in Wichita, Kan.
EADS, then part of a team led by Northrop Grumman Corp., won the tanker contract in 2008. But the deal unraveled after federal auditors, acting on a protest filed by Boeing, found problems with the way the Air Force conducted its review.
That led to a new competition beginning in July, when Boeing and EADS submitted new bids on the contract.
Thompson said Boeing executives concluded last week - after getting a look at the Air Force's technical analysis of the two competing planes - that they were beaten.
The Air Force sent the confidential analysis, known as an Integrated Fleet Aerial Refueling Assessment, to each of the companies in mid-November. But it mistakenly included a disk containing the Boeing analysis in the package shipped to EADS, and vice versa.
Both companies acknowledged that they received the errant disks and said they notified the Air Force as soon as they became aware of the mistake.
The Air Force called the mix-up a "clerical error" and said it took steps to ensure that neither side was put at a disadvantage. One of those steps, according to the Air Force, was to release the Boeing analysis to EADS and the EADS analysis to Boeing.
"We gave both competitors equal access to the information," Air Force spokesman Col. Les Kodlick said. "We view that as leveling the playing field."
Thompson, who has advocated for Boeing in the tanker contest, said Friday that he spoke to Boeing officials close to the competition. He said that, after reviewing the data, they concluded that EADS held a substantial edge in the Air Force's assessment.
"Basically they saw how they stacked up in the warfighting effectiveness analysis, and they did not stack up well," Thompson said. "The Air Force continues to favor the larger plane" offered by EADS.
The IFARA analysis is based on a complex computer modeling program that measures the effectiveness of each plane in a series of battlefield scenarios. The score could weigh heavily in a tight competition between two aircraft that offer different features.
Boeing has promoted its smaller KC-767 as "optimum sized" for the Air Force's needs, able to land on more runways and bring fuel closer to the front lines of combat.
EADS has touted the greater capability of its KC-30, a bigger plane that can carry larger amounts of cargo and passengers in addition to fuel.
Thompson said Boeing had some objections to the way the Air Force structured the analysis, but that the company's greater concern was a "pattern of bias" that appeared to skew the competition in favor of EADS.
A chief complaint, he said, was the Air Force's decision to exclude as a factor in the competition a recent ruling by the World Trade Organization that Airbus received illegal subsidies from European governments.
But Thompson said Boeing may have a difficult time proving - for a second time - that the tanker competition was flawed.
"In the first round, the errors were so fundamental and obvious," he said. "The pattern is much more subtle this time."
The Air Force dismissed Thompson's accusation of bias.
"We are continuing to work hard to ensure a fair and open competition for the tanker contract, and absolutely take issue with any suggestion to the contrary," Kodlick said.
al.com Monday, December 06, 2010
The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. will win the U.S. Air Force tanker contract over rival Boeing Co., according to a leading defense analyst.
Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said EADS has emerged as the clear favorite for the coveted deal, based on the Air Force's internal analysis of the two competing bids.
"Boeing has lost this competition," Thompson said, citing conversations with Boeing executives. "The only question now is whether they choose to protest the award, and I'm not sure they will."
Neither Boeing nor EADS would comment Sunday.
The Air Force said it expects to announce a winner for the potential $40 billion contract as early as next month. Chicago-based Boeing and EADS, the parent company of Airbus, are vying for the lucrative work to build 179 jet tankers for the Air Force.
It's the second round of competition between the American and European defense giants in a contest marked by fierce political fighting and prodigious marketing campaigns.
The battle has big stakes in Mobile. EADS has said that, if successful, it plans to assemble its KC-30 tankers at a $600 million, 1,500-worker factory to be constructed at Brookley Field.
Boeing has proposed to assemble its KC-767 tankers on its existing commercial assembly lines in Everett, Wash., and modify them for the military in Wichita, Kan.
EADS, then part of a team led by Northrop Grumman Corp., won the tanker contract in 2008. But the deal unraveled after federal auditors, acting on a protest filed by Boeing, found problems with the way the Air Force conducted its review.
That led to a new competition beginning in July, when Boeing and EADS submitted new bids on the contract.
Thompson said Boeing executives concluded last week - after getting a look at the Air Force's technical analysis of the two competing planes - that they were beaten.
The Air Force sent the confidential analysis, known as an Integrated Fleet Aerial Refueling Assessment, to each of the companies in mid-November. But it mistakenly included a disk containing the Boeing analysis in the package shipped to EADS, and vice versa.
Both companies acknowledged that they received the errant disks and said they notified the Air Force as soon as they became aware of the mistake.
The Air Force called the mix-up a "clerical error" and said it took steps to ensure that neither side was put at a disadvantage. One of those steps, according to the Air Force, was to release the Boeing analysis to EADS and the EADS analysis to Boeing.
"We gave both competitors equal access to the information," Air Force spokesman Col. Les Kodlick said. "We view that as leveling the playing field."
Thompson, who has advocated for Boeing in the tanker contest, said Friday that he spoke to Boeing officials close to the competition. He said that, after reviewing the data, they concluded that EADS held a substantial edge in the Air Force's assessment.
"Basically they saw how they stacked up in the warfighting effectiveness analysis, and they did not stack up well," Thompson said. "The Air Force continues to favor the larger plane" offered by EADS.
The IFARA analysis is based on a complex computer modeling program that measures the effectiveness of each plane in a series of battlefield scenarios. The score could weigh heavily in a tight competition between two aircraft that offer different features.
Boeing has promoted its smaller KC-767 as "optimum sized" for the Air Force's needs, able to land on more runways and bring fuel closer to the front lines of combat.
EADS has touted the greater capability of its KC-30, a bigger plane that can carry larger amounts of cargo and passengers in addition to fuel.
Thompson said Boeing had some objections to the way the Air Force structured the analysis, but that the company's greater concern was a "pattern of bias" that appeared to skew the competition in favor of EADS.
A chief complaint, he said, was the Air Force's decision to exclude as a factor in the competition a recent ruling by the World Trade Organization that Airbus received illegal subsidies from European governments.
But Thompson said Boeing may have a difficult time proving - for a second time - that the tanker competition was flawed.
"In the first round, the errors were so fundamental and obvious," he said. "The pattern is much more subtle this time."
The Air Force dismissed Thompson's accusation of bias.
"We are continuing to work hard to ensure a fair and open competition for the tanker contract, and absolutely take issue with any suggestion to the contrary," Kodlick said.
I/C
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Well somebody's being economical with the truth..... 
Boeing keeps protest options open as KC-X questions linger
The USAF initially said an investigation showed no proprietary data had been compromised on either side, but acknowledged on 1 December that one company accessed a computer file containing its competitors' data.
EADS has not denied that its employees gained access to the file, but says the compact disc was secured "the minute" the error was realised. Boeing, however, says two employees who received the compact disc recognised the problem before opening the file.
After inserting the disc into a classified laptop computer, the employees saw that the file name included an unexpected four characters - "K30B". EADS markets the US tanker version of the Airbus A330-200 as the KC-45, but previously advertised the aircraft as the KC-30B. The employees ejected the disc and called security, the company says. As the security team stored the disc in a sealed location, the employees notified the USAF of the potential error. "The air force gave them instructions that they followed completely," Boeing says. "It went the way it was supposed to."
Thompson said Boeing executives concluded last week - after getting a look at the Air Force's technical analysis of the two competing planes - that they were beaten. The Air Force sent the confidential analysis, known as an Integrated Fleet Aerial Refueling Assessment, to each of the companies in mid-November. But it mistakenly included a disk containing the Boeing analysis in the package shipped to EADS, and vice versa.........
Thompson, who has advocated for Boeing in the tanker contest, said Friday that he spoke to Boeing officials close to the competition. He said that, after reviewing the data, they concluded that EADS held a substantial edge in the Air Force's assessment. "Basically they saw how they stacked up in the warfighting effectiveness analysis, and they did not stack up well," Thompson said. "The Air Force continues to favor the larger plane" offered by EADS.
Thompson, who has advocated for Boeing in the tanker contest, said Friday that he spoke to Boeing officials close to the competition. He said that, after reviewing the data, they concluded that EADS held a substantial edge in the Air Force's assessment. "Basically they saw how they stacked up in the warfighting effectiveness analysis, and they did not stack up well," Thompson said. "The Air Force continues to favor the larger plane" offered by EADS.
The USAF initially said an investigation showed no proprietary data had been compromised on either side, but acknowledged on 1 December that one company accessed a computer file containing its competitors' data.
EADS has not denied that its employees gained access to the file, but says the compact disc was secured "the minute" the error was realised. Boeing, however, says two employees who received the compact disc recognised the problem before opening the file.
After inserting the disc into a classified laptop computer, the employees saw that the file name included an unexpected four characters - "K30B". EADS markets the US tanker version of the Airbus A330-200 as the KC-45, but previously advertised the aircraft as the KC-30B. The employees ejected the disc and called security, the company says. As the security team stored the disc in a sealed location, the employees notified the USAF of the potential error. "The air force gave them instructions that they followed completely," Boeing says. "It went the way it was supposed to."
I told you so...
Could the delayed tanker programme actually have a silver lining in bringing in new technology for KC-Y/Z? (Boeing)
Should this not happen and the programme be significantly delayed, there may also be another side-effect – extra time for more radical tanker solutions to be put forward -especially for the follow-on KC-Y/KC-Z contracts. By 2025, when the last of the initial batch of KC-X tankers should have been delivered, Blended Wing Bodies (BWB) aircraft may be viable. Boeing/NASA, for example, are still continuing flight tests with the X-48 scale BWB demonstrator (Made by UK’s Cranfield Aerospace) and a flying wing design could offer a breakthrough in volume and efficiency for a military tanker/transport. Without airline passengers to certify the aircraft for, a tanker would be an ideal first application of BWB technology.
The only bit missing from this is that X-48 is unmanned!
iRaven
Could the delayed tanker programme actually have a silver lining in bringing in new technology for KC-Y/Z? (Boeing)
Should this not happen and the programme be significantly delayed, there may also be another side-effect – extra time for more radical tanker solutions to be put forward -especially for the follow-on KC-Y/KC-Z contracts. By 2025, when the last of the initial batch of KC-X tankers should have been delivered, Blended Wing Bodies (BWB) aircraft may be viable. Boeing/NASA, for example, are still continuing flight tests with the X-48 scale BWB demonstrator (Made by UK’s Cranfield Aerospace) and a flying wing design could offer a breakthrough in volume and efficiency for a military tanker/transport. Without airline passengers to certify the aircraft for, a tanker would be an ideal first application of BWB technology.
iRaven
Even ol' Bubba Boeing dropped the idea of BWB airliners after receiving some very negative passenger reaction to the seat layout proposals...
Just consider this. In a normal wide-body airliner, such as the superlative Airbus A330, if you have an 8-abreast economy class 2+4+2 seating layout, the outermost passengers will experience a vertical motion of about 27" if the aircraft banks at 15deg - which is a normal option for 'passenger comfort'. To carry 240 passengers, you will need roughly 30 x 8 abreast rows.
If you carry 240 passengers in a BWB with 'amphitheatric' 24-abreast seating arranged in 10 rows, you will need 6 aisles for access / cabin service etc., leading to a 2+4+4+4+4+4+2 seating layout. Which means that the outermost passengers will experience a vertical motion of 27" in every 5 deg bank - I doubt whether this will be conducive to passenger comfort as, unlike a 15 deg AoB turn, a 5 deg AoB bank will probably be reversed to wings level rather sooner. Much as the Spams like their rendition-class seating in tanker-transports, I predict that by 2025 even they will have recognised that military passengers have basic human rights too and that ultra-wide bodied aircraft with 'amphitheatric' seating won't be acceptable.
Boeing once proposed a design with 10 passenger bays, 5 per deck. Most bays contained 2 triple seats (or 1 double and 1 triple) plus a central aisle. This required no less than 10 aisles and would have meant very few passengers indeed would have had any outside view; probably rather important to the poor souls in the outermost seats where every 4 degree twitch in turbulence would feel like a turn reversal in a normal aircraft.
Which leaves either single-role tankers, or tanker/freighters. Either of which would be less flexible than a true multi-role tanker transport such as the outstanding KC-45A.
The BWB is an elegant idea, but rather seems to be a solution to a problem which doesn't really exist.
Just consider this. In a normal wide-body airliner, such as the superlative Airbus A330, if you have an 8-abreast economy class 2+4+2 seating layout, the outermost passengers will experience a vertical motion of about 27" if the aircraft banks at 15deg - which is a normal option for 'passenger comfort'. To carry 240 passengers, you will need roughly 30 x 8 abreast rows.
If you carry 240 passengers in a BWB with 'amphitheatric' 24-abreast seating arranged in 10 rows, you will need 6 aisles for access / cabin service etc., leading to a 2+4+4+4+4+4+2 seating layout. Which means that the outermost passengers will experience a vertical motion of 27" in every 5 deg bank - I doubt whether this will be conducive to passenger comfort as, unlike a 15 deg AoB turn, a 5 deg AoB bank will probably be reversed to wings level rather sooner. Much as the Spams like their rendition-class seating in tanker-transports, I predict that by 2025 even they will have recognised that military passengers have basic human rights too and that ultra-wide bodied aircraft with 'amphitheatric' seating won't be acceptable.
Boeing once proposed a design with 10 passenger bays, 5 per deck. Most bays contained 2 triple seats (or 1 double and 1 triple) plus a central aisle. This required no less than 10 aisles and would have meant very few passengers indeed would have had any outside view; probably rather important to the poor souls in the outermost seats where every 4 degree twitch in turbulence would feel like a turn reversal in a normal aircraft.
Which leaves either single-role tankers, or tanker/freighters. Either of which would be less flexible than a true multi-role tanker transport such as the outstanding KC-45A.
The BWB is an elegant idea, but rather seems to be a solution to a problem which doesn't really exist.
I'm sure Mr O'Leary of RyanAir could market the outer seats to adreline junkies! 
He could sell ice to the Eskimos and has a number of famous quotes over the years:
1. On the airline’s no-frills business plan:
‘Our strategy is like Wal-Mart: We pile it high and sell it cheap’. (1994)
2. On charging for in-flight toilet use:
‘If someone wanted to pay Ł5 to go to the toilet I would carry them myself. I would wipe their bums for a fiver’. (2009)
3. On further possible in-flight charges:
‘At the moment the ice is free, but if we could find a way of targeting a price on it, we would’. (2005)
Anyway, fair point on BWB for pax carrying, but for AAR fuel tanks I don't believe it would be an issue?
iRaven
He could sell ice to the Eskimos and has a number of famous quotes over the years:
1. On the airline’s no-frills business plan:
‘Our strategy is like Wal-Mart: We pile it high and sell it cheap’. (1994)
2. On charging for in-flight toilet use:
‘If someone wanted to pay Ł5 to go to the toilet I would carry them myself. I would wipe their bums for a fiver’. (2009)
3. On further possible in-flight charges:
‘At the moment the ice is free, but if we could find a way of targeting a price on it, we would’. (2005)
Anyway, fair point on BWB for pax carrying, but for AAR fuel tanks I don't believe it would be an issue?
iRaven
No, it wouldn't be an issue - except that single role tankers are rather restricted in their usefulness and offer poor value for the financial outlay. Which is why the current requirement is for multi-role tanker transports.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Screw the BWB as a tanker, carrying around all that extra weight.
You either want a MRTT, or a dedicated tanker. The BWB is useless as a MRTT, for reasons as explained, and if yiy want a dedicated tanker you want a Northrop Force Employment Tanker, cutting out all the extraneous weight and manpower.
You either want a MRTT, or a dedicated tanker. The BWB is useless as a MRTT, for reasons as explained, and if yiy want a dedicated tanker you want a Northrop Force Employment Tanker, cutting out all the extraneous weight and manpower.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Looks like the writing is on the wall....
Motley Fool: Did Boeing Just Lose the Tanker Contract?
DoDBuzz: EADS Commits to KC-X Plant
Motley Fool: Did Boeing Just Lose the Tanker Contract?
DoDBuzz: EADS Commits to KC-X Plant
Some hilariously red-necked comments on those websites!
By the way, ORAC - what's the latest gen on the Italian KC-767I farce? Has Ol' Bubba Boeing managed yet to get the wing pods to work properly - within the customer's required flight envelope, that is?
By the way, ORAC - what's the latest gen on the Italian KC-767I farce? Has Ol' Bubba Boeing managed yet to get the wing pods to work properly - within the customer's required flight envelope, that is?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
And another one bites the dust for Boeing.....
Flightglobal: Brazil to seek deal for A330 tankers
After issuing a request for proposals in September, the Brazilian air force's KC-X tanker/transport procurement has taken an unexpected turn. Despite having initially forecast the participation of at least three bidders, sources in Brasilia indicate that Airbus Military's A330 multi-role tanker/transport might be selected before the end of the year.
Launched earlier in the decade to replace the air force's four Boeing KC-137 (707) tanker/transports, the use of which has been hampered by low availability rates over the last few years, the KC-X programme was fast-tracked early this year.
Problems with the service's sole long-range air transport assets were highlighted by its provision of only a small number of relief flights following the earthquake in Haiti early this year. Its KC-137s were then unable to take part in the 23-day Cruzex V exercise that was conducted during November.
However, it was the type's role as a long-range presidential transport that spurred the government to seek a quick replacement. Brazil purchased one Airbus A319CJ in 2005, but this is unable to satisfy seating and range requirements for longer presidential trips.
With an immediate requirement for two tanker/transports and an option for a third, Brazil's KC-X programme calls for one aircraft to be reconfigurable for presidential transport duties.
The air force originally expected Airbus to tender a proposal based on its A330-200-based MRTT design, with Boeing and Israel Aerospace Industries - the latter teamed with Brazil's VEM - to submit offers based on modified 767s. However, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has indicated that a selection will be finalised later this month.
Flightglobal: Brazil to seek deal for A330 tankers
After issuing a request for proposals in September, the Brazilian air force's KC-X tanker/transport procurement has taken an unexpected turn. Despite having initially forecast the participation of at least three bidders, sources in Brasilia indicate that Airbus Military's A330 multi-role tanker/transport might be selected before the end of the year.
Launched earlier in the decade to replace the air force's four Boeing KC-137 (707) tanker/transports, the use of which has been hampered by low availability rates over the last few years, the KC-X programme was fast-tracked early this year.
Problems with the service's sole long-range air transport assets were highlighted by its provision of only a small number of relief flights following the earthquake in Haiti early this year. Its KC-137s were then unable to take part in the 23-day Cruzex V exercise that was conducted during November.
However, it was the type's role as a long-range presidential transport that spurred the government to seek a quick replacement. Brazil purchased one Airbus A319CJ in 2005, but this is unable to satisfy seating and range requirements for longer presidential trips.
With an immediate requirement for two tanker/transports and an option for a third, Brazil's KC-X programme calls for one aircraft to be reconfigurable for presidential transport duties.
The air force originally expected Airbus to tender a proposal based on its A330-200-based MRTT design, with Boeing and Israel Aerospace Industries - the latter teamed with Brazil's VEM - to submit offers based on modified 767s. However, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has indicated that a selection will be finalised later this month.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
My, my, such throwing of toys out of the cot by a Boeing mouthpiece. I think the telling point is the editor's postscript. The aviation press seem to be less on board with Boeing this time round....
Tanker Wars: Why Boeing Is Losing
Tanker Wars: Why Boeing Is Losing
Passion Flying Hobby Science Sponsor Work
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belgium
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Free competition?
I have been rereading this thread with great interest.
As a European that lived and worked in the US, I start getting the feeling that the US patriotism gets in the way of liberalism. I would say it starts looking as "Free competition ... as long as we win...".
Perhaps a cynical remark about the alleged subsidies (with whom as a tax payer I totally don't agree, this is a culture clash): America should be grateful to get a plane that cost me a lot of taxes. By the way in the US I was living in Taxachusetts before prop 2 and 1/2.
m2c
d3
As a European that lived and worked in the US, I start getting the feeling that the US patriotism gets in the way of liberalism. I would say it starts looking as "Free competition ... as long as we win...".
Perhaps a cynical remark about the alleged subsidies (with whom as a tax payer I totally don't agree, this is a culture clash): America should be grateful to get a plane that cost me a lot of taxes. By the way in the US I was living in Taxachusetts before prop 2 and 1/2.
m2c
d3
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Ares: FSTA Dry Run
irbus Military has completed initial trials of the fuselage refueling unit for the RAF's Future Strategic Transport Aircraft. The FSU is the certline hose-and-droge refueling system.
The dry contacts were made using a Spanish air force EF-18, since FSTA's development is taking place in Spain.
Even if not intentionally, using a Spanish air force fighter is somewhat symbolic since the FSTA fleet will likely be spending a good part of its time refueling non-RAF aircraft, given the U.K.'s fighter inventory is in sharp decline even as the number of FSTAs being acquired under the Air Tanker fee-for-service arrangement remains constant at 14 aircraft.
The test flight Dec. 13 lasted 160 minutes, and covered an operating envelop of 8,000-35,000 ft. altitude and speeds of 180-325 knots, the manufacturer says.
The FRU can provide a higher fuel flow-rate than the underwing hose-and-drogue system. Half the fleet will be equipped with the FRU.
irbus Military has completed initial trials of the fuselage refueling unit for the RAF's Future Strategic Transport Aircraft. The FSU is the certline hose-and-droge refueling system.
The dry contacts were made using a Spanish air force EF-18, since FSTA's development is taking place in Spain.
Even if not intentionally, using a Spanish air force fighter is somewhat symbolic since the FSTA fleet will likely be spending a good part of its time refueling non-RAF aircraft, given the U.K.'s fighter inventory is in sharp decline even as the number of FSTAs being acquired under the Air Tanker fee-for-service arrangement remains constant at 14 aircraft.
The test flight Dec. 13 lasted 160 minutes, and covered an operating envelop of 8,000-35,000 ft. altitude and speeds of 180-325 knots, the manufacturer says.
The FRU can provide a higher fuel flow-rate than the underwing hose-and-drogue system. Half the fleet will be equipped with the FRU.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Well whatever, happens, it's not happening anytime soon...
Air Force tanker decision likely delayed by Senate hearing - TheHill.com
Air Force tanker decision likely delayed by Senate hearing - TheHill.com
But now, there is mounting evidence that an award will not be possible until March, or perhaps later, says Loren Thompson, a defense insider who is the COO at the Lexington Institute, citing conversations with executives.
The driving force behind this latest delay is a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing slated for Jan. 27. At that session, the panel will seek answers from Air Force officials about a mishap that saw the service send data about EADS's and Boeing's tanker bids.
The driving force behind this latest delay is a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing slated for Jan. 27. At that session, the panel will seek answers from Air Force officials about a mishap that saw the service send data about EADS's and Boeing's tanker bids.
It seems that the 767 is not considered good enough by Beoing to be submitted as a contender for the Indian Air Force requirements.
Boeing 747 and Airbus A380 Aircraft News from Flightglobal
Boeing 747 and Airbus A380 Aircraft News from Flightglobal