Boeing KC-46 First Flight

Boeing have conducted the first flight of the initial fully configured KC-46 Pegasus tanker designed to replace USAF KC-135 and KC-10s from 2016. This is the culmination of a saga dating back to 2002 which saw a USAF decision to lease KC-767s overturned in favour of starting the formal KC-X Programme in 2006 which selected the A330 based KC-30 in 2008.

Predictably, Boeing appealed and a renewed KC-X Request for Proposals was launched in 2010. Following some further comedy (such as the USAF accidentally releasing their technical evaluations of the wrong aircraft to opposing sides!!) and lots of VERY murky pork-barrel politics, Boeing were awarded the contract in 2011. Even then the controversy wasn't over with further twists and turns regarding Boeing build standards, a wiring redesign and - most recently - further delays due to fuel contamination!

KC-46 procurement is expected to deliver 179 aircraft over the next 13 years with further orders likely.

Regards,
MM
 
You could have forecast the whole sorry saga the minute Airbus won the contract.

Special relationship my ARRSE.

Porkbarrel rolling indeed.
 
T

Tinman74

Guest
You could have forecast the whole sorry saga the minute Airbus won the contract.

Special relationship my ARRSE.

Porkbarrel rolling indeed.
Similar to the VH helibob saga, CSARX saga.

And they seem to moan and whinge about the subsidised Arabian airlines.
 
You could have forecast the whole sorry saga the minute Airbus won the contract.

Special relationship my ARRSE.

Porkbarrel rolling indeed.
What has the Special Relationship got to do with Airbus? Its HQ is in the Netherlands and France, its shares are traded on 4 European exchanges, none of which are in the UK, and its predecessors were French, German and Spanish. BAE used to own 20% of it, but was not a constituent company of Airbus (hence BAE still exists today as a separate company). The Broughton and Filton plants were contributed to Airbus during the BAE shareholding. BAE sold its Airbus shares 9 years ago.

There is no UK ownership of Airbus. Therefore no Special Relationship issues arise.

But I agree, the Boeing/Airbus/Boeing thing seems a bit suspicious. Then again, Northrop Grumman were priming the Airbus deal, and the aircraft would have been built in the US, so not completely xenophobic. It does seem that Boeing's political schmoozers were better than the NGC ones though.
 
What has the Special Relationship got to do with Airbus? Its HQ is in the Netherlands and France, its shares are traded on 4 European exchanges, none of which are in the UK, and its predecessors were French, German and Spanish. BAE used to own 20% of it, but was not a constituent company of Airbus (hence BAE still exists today as a separate company). The Broughton and Filton plants were contributed to Airbus during the BAE shareholding. BAE sold its Airbus shares 9 years ago.

There is no UK ownership of Airbus. Therefore no Special Relationship issues arise.

But I agree, the Boeing/Airbus/Boeing thing seems a bit suspicious. Then again, Northrop Grumman were priming the Airbus deal, and the aircraft would have been built in the US, so not completely xenophobic. It does seem that Boeing's political schmoozers were better than the NGC ones though.
You've forgotten that France is now bezzers with America, right? ;)
 
Similar to the VH helibob saga, CSARX saga.

And they seem to moan and whinge about the subsidised Arabian airlines.
I agree, the VH thing was a clusterfuck, although the EH101 wasn't the best fit for CSAR-X anyway.

However, these government programs have got absolutely fcuk all to do with the private US airlines' dissatisfaction with Gulf airlines being subsidized. Richard Anderson, CEO of Delta got himself in quite a bit of poo earlier this year with his allegations.
 
T

Tinman74

Guest
Iirc some senior septic announced it last year ? Or year before... There was an Arrse outrage thread on it.
Old news when we decided not to bomb asad, who'd have thought parliament would roll a seven.
 
The question is will this much troubled Boeing 767 tanker airplane enter squadron service during the lifetime of many of those on here reading this?.

The whole sorry saga has seen people imprisoned over corruption in the US, massive delays and probably the project being way over budget.

I believe Congress has tried to kill this project off, but were fought off by the US Air Force.

The service entry of the first Boeing 767 tankers for the Aeronautica Militare Italiano and the Japan Air Self Defense Force and the delays associated with the same hardly inspires confidence, although the Japanese have budgered 3 KC-46(J)? in their Fiscal Year 15 budget.
 
The question is will this much troubled Boeing 767 tanker airplane enter squadron service during the lifetime of many of those on here reading this?
Yes it will.

It's too important a capability to fail and Boeing is too powerful to let that happen.

Regards,
MM
 
Hurrah! Now passing the $6 billion mark in development costs.

Well technically it has only cost the USAF $4.9 billion so far, the rest was abosorbed by Boeing. I wonder if they can hit $10 billion before entering service. Just to stick a boom and revised fuel system in an existing airframe.
 
Last edited:
If only there were something proven and already on the market that could do the job.....
... That was built in tbe good ol' US of A....

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
 
Edited to say...

As an aside, Japan has also elected to buy the KC-46 although they already operate KC-767 and E-767s.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
@oldsoak

Time will tell if my views are 'BS' old chap but I stand by them and expect to see the KC-46 progress through OT&E broadly on time. In addition, we should remember that Japan has also elected to buy the type.

Regards,
MM
Eh ? I've never given you a bs ?! If I did I heartily apologise - please point it out and I shall remove it forthwith
Rgds

Spotted - must be sodding fat fingers on small screen, error corrected !
 
Eh ? I've never given you a bs ?! If I did I heartily apologise - please point it out and I shall remove it forthwith
Rgds

Spotted - must be sodding fat fingers on small screen, error corrected !
No snags @oldsoak! Easily done! :)

Regards,
MM
 
Top