Why the Air Force Chose the 767 Airframe for the KC-46: A Controversial Decision

The Air Force and Boeing's decision to use the 767 airframe for the KC-46 aerial tanker has been a subject of much debate and controversy. Critics question whether this choice is a wise one, as the 767 airframe might not be the most fitting platform for the mission requirements. This article explains the complex nuances of the decision-making process and why the 767 was chosen over alternatives like the 777.

Request for Proposals and the Complex Decision-Making Process

The process of selecting an aircraft for such a critical mission involves an intricate and multi-faceted approach. The Air Force issues a request for proposals (RFP), detailing the requirements and criteria for the mission. Vendors can ask questions regarding the RFP, but they are often kept confidential to maintain a fair competition.

The decision-making process is highly complex and involves numerous factors, including capabilities, lifecycle costs, and operational requirements. After vendors submit their proposals, the Air Force evaluates them based on a weighted scoring system. The process can sometimes require revisiting and restarting due to unmet material needs and requirements.

The key point to understand is that the decision to use the 767 airframe was made by Boeing, not the Air Force. Boeing, in response to the RFP, demonstrated that the 767 was the most suitable and cost-effective platform for the KC-46 mission. The Air Force's role was to evaluate and select the best proposal.

Understanding the KC-135 R/E and KC-10 Tankers

The decision to replace the aging KC-135 R and E tankers is based on their advanced age. These aircraft, with their airframes dating back to the 1950s and 1960s, are reaching the end of their service lives. They are among the aircraft that need to be replaced to ensure the Air Force maintains a modern and capable fleet.

On the other hand, the KC-10 airframe, while also an older model, is still in service. Approximately 59 out of the original 60 KC-10 tankers are still operational, indicating that this airframe is still functional and reliable. However, the KC-10's age and obsolescence mean that eventually, it too will reach the end of its service life, necessitating replacement.

The Air Force's goal is to replace the KC-135s with the KC-46 to ensure modern capabilities. The KC-46 is not meant to compete with the KC-10 in terms of payload and capacity, as both serve different missions and their replacements reflect the phase of their respective lifecycle.

Modernization and Technological Advancements

The KC-46 program was designed to modernize the Air Force's aerial refueling capabilities, leveraging the latest technology to enhance performance and efficiency. The 767 airframe is well-suited for this mission due to its proven track record, reliability, and fuel-carrying capacity. It also offers adaptable space for mission-specific equipment and personnel.

While the 767 might not be a direct competitor to the KC-10 in terms of payload, it is more in line with the capabilities of the KC-10's predecessor, the KC-135. The KC-46 is designed to provide equivalent or better performance than the aging KC-135s, ensuring the Air Force can focus on other modernization efforts for the KC-10.

In conclusion, the decision to use the 767 airframe for the KC-46 program was a result of a complex evaluation process that prioritized mission-specific requirements, lifecycle costs, and technological advancements. The KC-46 is not meant to compete with the KC-10 in terms of payload or service life but rather to provide modernized aerial refueling capabilities.