It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

KC-X, KC-Y, KC-Z

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Most of us have heard about the KC-X competition already. The RFP was sent out (all 7,000 pages
), with Boeing pitting the KC-767 (based on the 767-200ER against the KC-30 (Airbus A300-200F) from Airbus/Northrop Grumman. This is phase one of the planned phase out of the KC-135, and will result in the purchase of 175 production aircraft, with 4 test aircraft.

Phase two of the KC-135 phase out will be the KC-Y competition. The KC-Y competition will begin sometime around 2023. It is rumored that Boeing will change their game plan for this competition, and will be offering the X-48 BWB for the second buy.

In or around 2033 will be phase three of the competition. All KC-135s should be retired by this point. This will be the KC-Z competition.

The Air Force plans to spend no more than $3B annually, which will allow the purchase of between 12 and 18 aircraft a year.

Both aircraft in the KC-X will be required to be able to fly into all the bases that the KC-135 currently services, plus an additional 1,000 bases it can't get in to, as well as being able to move cargo, passengers, medical personnel and patients.

The KC-30 will hold approximately 45,000 pounds more fuel than the KC-135 does now. No word on the fuel totals for the KC-767 but I would assume that it would be pretty similar to the KC-30. The KC-767 will have the 777 flight deck.

GE and Pratt & Whitney are both holding their breath with this competition as well. GE is looking at approximately $5B in sales if the KC-30 is selected.

The SRD makes interesting reading to see everything this aircraft will have to do.

[edit on 11/26/2007 by Zaphod58]




posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:37 PM
link   
likely a future I can not approach, even bomber replacement project is more near us.



posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Small correction the KC30 is based on airbus A330 not A300, probably a typo



posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Yeah, I was kinda hurried as I typed it and missed that. Thanks for the correction.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Well the RFPs were all submitted, and the contract award date has come and gone with no announcement yet. The flight tests for both are proceeding fairly well. Both aircraft have been in conctact with receivers, the KC-767 has passed FAA certifications, and done at least one night refueling flight. The KC-30 has tested the wingtip drogues, as well as the refueling boom.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Wasn't sure if anybody knew this yet, but the KC-X has been officially designated the KC-45.

Cheers!



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Mindspin77
 


Wasn't aware yet of that info. Its custom on the forums to post a link if you have one for this type of information. Thanks Eh and welcome to the forums!



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Canada_EH
 

The info came from this weeks' Aviation Week so I'm sure it's fairly reliable.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   
I have seen it mentioned elsewhere too, but I wonder if the announcement isn't perhaps a little premature?

If not, it must be the first time that a designation has been applied to a requirement rather than an aircraft? After all, the YC-14 and YC-15 were rivals for AMST, and until the winning design from McDonnell Douglas was selected for production the aircraft that became the C-17 was just another contender under the umbrella name of C-X. This sort of pattern can be seen again and again ie X-32 and 35, YF-22 and 23, YF-16 and 17 etc etc

I've never known it done before where they say 'the plane that wins will be the KC-45'. Very odd.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Here's a source for it.


KC-X is now KC-45 and Other Updates
The US Air Force says it plans to award a sole-source contract in the KC-X (now called
the KC-45) aerial tanker program despite pressure from some politicians and Northrop
Grumman to award a split buy. Boeing said Monday that it believes any move for a split
buy would require stopping the competition and reissuing the Request for Proposal.

www.leeham.net...



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 02:36 AM
link   
Perhaps the designation has been chosen because the decision has allready been made to buy Boeing,.... uhhmm... before the decision has been made?


LEE.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:12 AM
link   
Huh? What does KC-45 have to do with Boeing? It's simply a designation. As for the decision to buy Boeing before making a decision, that's what happened last time, and it isn't going to happen again. The whole reason we're so many years down the road without them being in service is BECAUSE of the oddities with the Boeing contract. There's no WAY that it would happen again.



posted on Feb, 16 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Looks like the new contract date is on or around the 25th of February. Have to see if they live up to this one. The protests are going to tie this up for years though, whoever wins it.



posted on Feb, 20 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Well there is a contingency plan with a $240 million Tanker Transfer Fund. Now is this meant to appease the loser? I don't understand who or what would be transfered.

[edit on 20-2-2008 by Canada_EH]



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Looks like Monday is the new date of award. We'll have to see if they're actually going to announce it then or not. I'm hoping that they will and we can get this into protest, so that sometime in the next 10 years we'll get a new tanker going.

Japan accepted delivery of two of their KC767s. Italy will be getting their first one in the next couple of months.



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Canada_EH
 


I'm still looking into this. I THINK it lets them transfer funds into the program for other uses. Such as dealing with protests that would tie funds up for years to come.



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Yeah thats sorta the link I made as well. Looking forward to monday and the *fingers crossed* anouncement of the contract winner. Its the overdue and much needed for the air force thats for sure. Personally I'd be ok with either one winning and there is benifits to both thats for sure.Any prefence on your part Zaph?



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Personally I'd like to see the 767 get it, but I really wish they had gone with a -400 base instead. I just prefer Boeing over Airbus. Although "professionally" I just want to see the contract awarded to SOMEONE. I'm surprised we haven't seen the KC's going the way of the Eagle's yet and dropping out of the sky.



posted on Feb, 23 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   
if they take the 767 then tbh there are idiots - the airbus carries more fuel , more cargo , has longer legs and is just as fuel efficient - meaning it can carry more further for the same money.


northrop would build the airbus anyway so both will be built in the usa



posted on Feb, 23 2008 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Yes, that is true. Even Boeing knows it. I had a giggle when I read a statement from Boeing earlier on in the competition that translated from corporate speak along the lines of 'which plane is best shouldn't be the deciding factor' although they didn't word it like that. I remember thinking 'don't worry, it wont be.' Cynical old me




top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join