TOPICS

Air Force concedes mistakes in tanker cost estimates

CongressDaily June 12, 2008

The Air Force has conceded that Boeing Co.'s proposed KC-767 aerial refueling tanker would cost less over time than the winning plane offered by Northrop Grumman Corp and its European subcontractor EADS, Boeing told auditors reviewing its protest against the Air Force decision, Reuters reported.

News of Air Force errors in calculating the life cycle costs of the competing bids, which were also confirmed by Northrop, comes as the GAO prepares to rule by June 19 on the Boeing protest.

In a 191-page document filed with the GAO, Boeing said mistakes in calculating the life cycle costs of the airplanes raised questions about the thoroughness and credibility of the Air Force's overall evaluation.

RELATED STORIES

But Northrop downplayed the impact of the Air Force error, saying life cycle costs were just one part of the Air Force evaluation. The final decision was based on the capabilities of its KC-30 tanker, not cost alone, Northrop officials said.

The Air Force declined comment.

VIEW ALL 11 COMMENTS POST COMMENT

COMMENTS

  • I can speak from experience that no contracts person and no person willingley screws up something of this magnitude. While it won't end your career, it will effectively end your upward mobility. Heads are rolling on this one and I would imagine this is a very uncomfortable spot to work at right now. The Air Force will not officially comment because it's career limiting. I don't know any military office of rank that will comment until he gets his ducks (answers) in a row. When they go in front of the media, they will be lambasted, so time for some fact finding and egg off face recovery. This was a mess up all the way round. The only way to redeem the govt's position is to cancel the award and recompete. Then make sure your evaluation panel is filled with different members then last time. Answer the American people honestly when you go in front of the media. No spin.
    a contracts person Posted June 20, 2008 11:12 AM
  • Is this strategic incompetence? Did AF intentionally screw this up in apparently obvious ways so that Boeing could effectively protest the contract award? Is this why AF has remained silent while Boeing and Grumman have waged a public war of words over this? Am I that paranoid? If Boeing had won up front given the history would anyone believe it was fair and square? Why do I only have questions? Will Congress have any of the same questions?
    mike Posted June 19, 2008 10:03 AM
  • How in the world did "Reuters reported that Boeing told auditors that the Air Force said the long term costs would be lower" turn into "Air Force concedes mistakes"? Long term cost was only one element of the tanker evaluation. And nowhere do I see any Air Force official's name tied to this statement. GovExec can certainly do better than a "he said they said she said" rumor mill story on such a critical issue.
    K D Posted June 19, 2008 9:42 AM
VIEW ALL 11 COMMENTS

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR