"Boeing is ready to deliver maximum capability at the lowest cost"

That cannot possibly be true.

A totally contradictory statement.


Looks like Boeing have another idiot accountant in charge rather than an engineer.




[edit on 15/9/09 by kilcoo316]

Interesting to see how this pans out as Boeing thrash around and try to stall and delay.

That aside, the previous competition had a focus on the "made in USA" credentials. I thought the 777 - which I assume the KC-777 will be based upon is quite a bit (er) foreign?

Regards

Here its more easy to see how uneven were the 2 options, therefore understanding better the choice for the KC-30.
Now with a KC-777 on the market would be a whole new deal depending of course the price differences between them.

B777-200LR would be the most probable choice for the KC-777, personally i think its suits pretty good the role of USAF tanker. Its beautiful!
Here goes more comparisons between the old offer and the probable new offer:



[edit on 12-11-2009 by polar]

as fred said in the OP - the KC-777 exists only on paper , as of right now only the 767 and A330 represent the minimal risk as both types are allready entering service (the 330 in its near final usaf form is allready in australia) whilst frakentanker (the 767) does need a few extras but japan has a 767 version as well