While France elevates the complaints over Northrop Grumman’s withdrawal from the USAF KC-X competition to a head-of-state level, a Boeing insider has leaked the company’s secret NewGen tanker plans to this column. We show the exclusive picture after the jump.
Update, March 9, 7am PST:
EADS will not independently bid for the KC-X contract, Market Watch reports.
Update, 1pm PST:
Northrop will no-bid and not protest, we have confirmed. EADS is undecided whether to proceed with a bid on its own but it is unlikely. Northrop’s decision was reached over the weekend.
The USAF RFP was built to be a bid for the cheapest tanker, in the view of a source close to the competition. It was unwinnable by Northrop, it was concluded.
In the near-term, this kills the Airbus plan to build a production facility in Alabama.
As we reported Feb. 23, a DOD document pretty well indicated that the extra capability of the KC-30 wasn’t important in this round but that it would be considered in a future competition.
Northrop bid $184m in the 2007 competition it won for the KC-30 and suggests that taxpayers need to be sure Boeing comes in below this price as a sole-source bidder.
The full Northrop press release is below the jump.
Northrop Grumman may decide this week or next what it will do about the bid for the USAF KC-X Final Request for Proposal, Leeham.net understands.
Northrop has said frequently and clearly that it may not bid because it believes the FRFP is skewed toward Boeing’s KC-767, and we are satisfied this is no idle threat. But we also believe that while the odds, as things stand today, are that Northrop won’t bid, don’t consider this a sure thing.
The Final Request for Proposals for the USAF’s KC-X aerial tanker is due to be issued Feb. 23. The controversial and hotly contested procurement between Boeing and Northrop Grumman is supposed to be decided as a result of information provided in the FRFP, but does another document issued this month by DOD hint at the outcome?
The death today of US Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, means US Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Boeing/WA) will likely succeed him, and this is bad news for Northrop Grumman and its bid for the KC-X USAF aerial tanker.
Murtha supported a plan to split the buy between Northrop’s KC-30, based on the Airbus A330-200, and Boeing’s KC-767 despite opposition from the Department of Defense for a dual procurement. Murtha believed a split buy was the only solution that would win Congressional funding to replace the 50-year old Boeing KC-135s.
Last week was quite active in aerospace and so were we, unable to post. So here’s a recap of some of the things that occurred and our thoughts.
More politics and the Tanker
For the past two years we have bemoaned the politicizing of the procurement process for the KC-X tanker, extending our criticism mostly on previous Boeing efforts with its Congressional supporters–most notably Sen. Patty Murray (D-Boeing/WA) and Reps. Norm Dicks (D-Boeing/WA) and Todd Tiahrt (R-Boeing/KS). Now comes Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Northrop/AL) who, in a display that represents all the worst of what’s wrong with Congress, placed a hold on 70 Obama Administration appointments in a fit over his displeasure of the KC-X Request for Proposals and his belief it disadvantages the Northrop Grumman KC-30.
Update, Feb. 1:
The newspaper The Hill, which covers Capitol Hill, reports the USAF plans to award a contract for the KC-X this summer, sticking (more or less) to the timetable originally projected. Secretary Robert Gates also plans to urge President Obama to veto any FY2011 defense bill that contains funding for the Boeing C-17, which Gates cuts from the proposed budget.
We believe cutting funding for the C-17 is a mistake. We also believe the Administration ought to take Stimulus funds, double the KC-X procurement from 12-18 tankers a year (resulting in retiring the ancient KC-135s a lot faster) and split the contract between Boeing for the KC-767 and Northrop Grumman for the KC-30. In addition to the only political solution that will work, there are solid strategic reasons for the procurement to be split.
Taking Stimulus money to establish a new aerospace industrial base in Mobile (AL) while supporting the existing 767 program is far more productive than giving Stimulus money to things like a California dinner train.
Original Post:
Here’s a commentary from an outfit we’d never heard of before, the Forerunner Foundation. This op-ed piece appeared in the January 11 issue of Aviation Week magazine. The writer, Jerry Cox, makes an interesting point over the campaign by Boeing supporters to exclude the Northrop Grumman (Airbus) bid for the KC-X tanker.
We wonder what took Boeing so long to make this obvious point: France is protectionist in its defense purchases and should quit complaining about the KC-X competition in the US. See this Reuters story.
Introduction
2009 has faded into history and 2010 is here. Last year wasn’t kind to Airbus or Boeing—though it was worse for the latter than the former. How will this year be?
We’ll get right into how we see things lining up for the two largest airframe OEMs for this year.
Update, December 8:
Bill Barksdale, Boeing KC-7A7 spokesman, emailed us with a response to this column. We have posted his note in the Comments section below.
Original Post:
The USAF used criteria in the current Draft RFP for the KC-X competition that had been rejected by the Government Accountability Office’s review of the Boeing protest last year, an analysis by prepared by EADS North America and Northrop Grumman asserts.
This unfairly tilts the current DRFP toward the Boeing KC-767 and is the basis Northrop why said it will not submit a bid unless major changes are made with the Final RFP.