EADS: Boeing’s “dumbed-down” KC-767 increases KC-Y prospects

Flight International ^ | 20/04/11 | Stephen Trimble

[sukhoi-30mki]

EADS: Boeing’s “dumbed-down” KC-767 increases KC-Y prospects

By Stephen Trimble

EADS North America's top executive says recent disclosures by Boeing show the KC-767 was "dumbed-down" to win the US Air Force KC-X contract, potentially opening the door for KC-45 sales in the future.

Sean O'Keefe, EADS NA chief executive, declined in an interview to admonish Boeing for his competitor's recent acknowledgement that marketing materials advertising a KC-767 with fuel-saving winglets throughout the competition were false.

"I'm not going to pass judgement on anybody's marketing strategy or any competitor's veracity," O'Keefe said. "I wouldn't do that."

But the absence of winglets from the production configuration of the KC-767, which has been redesignated the KC-46A by the US Air Force, offer a clue about Boeing's winning strategy, O'Keefe says.

"You can do this by extension," O'Keefe says. "The only room for margin between the capacity of what you could do today [with the KC-767] and what [Boeing] is offering is to dumb-down the capabilities. As long as you don't go below the capabilities you're able to produce today, you're compliant. As every unfolding chapter is telling us, this is precisely how [Boeing] unfolded their strategy."

O'Keefe does not fault Boeing for removing the winglets or "dumbing-down" the KC-767 configuration to win the contract.

"[The Boeing KC-46A] really is going to be a KC-135 replacement," O'Keefe says. "There's no reason to be shocked by that. That's what [the air force] said they wanted and that's what they got delivered."

But EADS perceives an opportunity for a larger tanker in the USAF inventory.

"That now opens up the opportunity to say, 'What about [the requirement for delivering maximum] fuel at range and all these other things," O'Keefe says.

"That's a requirement that may or may not drive [the launch] of KC-Y, but it's certainly is a higher prospect today than it might have been before," O'Keefe says, adding, "and particularly as each chapter unfolds we start seeing more and more what the KC-46A is going to look like. My goodness, it looks more like a KC-135 than anything else -- again, just like the air force asked for. There is nothing under-handed about that at all. That's precisely what they said they wanted."

Boeing did not respond directly to O'Keefe's comments about dumbing-down the KC-767 proposal, but provided a statement calling the KC-46A "the most advanced tanker ever built" and featuring "amazing multi-role capabilities".

[sukhoi-30mki]

The Boeing Company has received a contract from the U.S. Air Force to build the next-generation aerial refueling tanker aircraft that will replace 179 of the service’s 400 KC-135 tankers. In this artist's conception, a Boeing KC-46A prepares to refuel a B-1B bomber in flight.

[sinanju]

Piecemeal contracting?

I’ve had it! At this rate, by the time the KC-135 is fully replaced we’ll be driving flying saucers!

[ltc8k6]

Initial PR materials often do not match the final product. You can see this in many aircraft proposals.

Raked wingtips would be far superior to winglets, however it seems that winglets are of little value on typical tanker missions.

767 winglets have been causing problems on the civilian airplanes.

The 767 tankers that are already out there in service, do not have winglets.

Winglets can be added later if they become a valuable addition to the tankers.

Boeing’s proposal did not include winglets.

If winglets were so valuable to tankers, why didn’t the USAF put them on the older tankers?

Well, it’s not that simple, of course...

[MHalblaub]

“I’ve had it! At this rate, by the time the KC-135 is fully replaced we’ll be driving flying saucers!”

An Airbus KC-Y may be earlier on duty than a KC-767NG.