Search the archive:
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids (Read 241 times)
Jan 20th, 2011 at 1:43pm

OVERLORD_CHRIS   Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC

Gender: male
Posts: 1148
*****
 
Quote:
USAF Assesses New KC-10 Upgrade Bids


Jan 20, 2011

By Amy Butler

Contractors submitted revised proposals for the U.S. Air Force’s KC-10 CNS/ATM upgrade work this month after the service discovered it botched the first competitive round last year that resulted in a $216 million award going to Boeing.

Boeing was ordered to stop work on the contract in October owing to a mistake made by the Air Force in the original competition. Air Force Col. Michael Schmidt, contractor logistics support program director for the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center (where the contract is managed), acknowledged a “need for corrective action associated with the original source selection,” but has not specified the nature of the problem.

Industry sources have suggested there was a misunderstanding about whether a piece of equipment was to be furnished by the government during the original competition.

Competitors from the original round were invited to resubmit bids if they were deemed “in the competitive range,” though Air Force officials declined to identify how this status was determined , to maintain the integrity of the source selection.

Boeing has submitted a proposal, and the company is “confident that the solution we originally provided and our current solution is superior,” according to spokesman Scott Day. Meanwhile, the company is likely trying to keep as much of the team together as possible, despite the stop-work order.

A General Electric/L-3 Communications team also has submitted a new bid. Northrop Grumman, which participated in the original competition last year, opted not to submit this time .

Air Force officials say they intend to award the contract no later than June. Boeing won its contract for this work in June 2010.

The contract will cover two aircraft modified to support FAA certification and flight testing. Options will be included for the upgrade of all 59 KC-10 aircraft.

Air Force officials still intend to finish the installations by Sept. 30, 2015, to achieve full operational capability as originally planned, despite the year-long hiatus required to collect new bids.

The work must be done by then because restrictions will go into effect limiting aircraft with the old cockpit equipment to less-efficient air routes.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/asd/2011/01/20/01.xml&h...
 

...
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Jan 20th, 2011 at 2:18pm

Ivan   Offline
Colonel
No, I'm NOT Russian, I
only like Russian aircraft
The netherlands

Gender: male
Posts: 6058
*****
 
What is the reason why they didn't buy more KC-10s instead of keeping the huge herd of KC-135 variants. Or is there some technical reason for keeping the old planes
 

Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and An-24RV&&&&AI flightplans and repaints can be found here
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Jan 20th, 2011 at 2:58pm

OVERLORD_CHRIS   Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC

Gender: male
Posts: 1148
*****
 
When they bought the original 60, they were some of the last few new ones off the assembly line, and they waited to late to decide that they needed more, and by that time, every one started moving on to Twin Engine ETOPS once engine performance was much more reliable. Now they are becoming harder to maintain with the ops tempo. But since they can still fly until the KC-Y/Z bid comes up, it is cheaper to go glass flight deck like the Dutch KDC-10.

Also the USAF would not buy used cargo planes for fuelers, they would have to be new, since they would have to be able to fly for no less then 40years before they consider replacing them with something with greater capacity, rage, and performance.

So it would not make since to buy a used DC-10, or MD-11 and convert it, because the way they fly it, much like FedEx and UPS, they would run the air frame hours up in a hurry, as well as run the risk of unforeseen metal fatigue like in the KC-135.

**Also C-17 & C-5 Pilots hate taking gas from 3 Engine Tanker, even though they carry the most fuel. The #2 motor blows directly onto the Horizontal Stabilizer During Air refueling, it causes to much turbulence and you run the risk of breaking away more often** 
 

...
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print