Boeing and EADS are locked in a war of words about which replacement tanker would have better served the US Air Force during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). While Boeing argues that the smaller KC-767 is sized correctly for the air force needs, Airbus counters that the KC-330 provides nearly the same fuel offload using 20% fewer aircraft.
The findings come from rival analyses compiled by each company and presented last week during the Aerial Refueling Systems Advisory Group (ARSAG) conference. EADS had declined to respond to a nearly one-month-old report by Boeing Phantom Works that directly compares the KC-767 to the KC-330, but finally issued a point-by-point rebuttal.
The dispute comes too late to influence recent decisions by Australia and the UK to select the KC-330, but opens a new chapter of discord between the competitors in the widening debate about the direction of the US Air Force tanker requirement.
Analysing four unlisted airfields used by KC-135s during OIF, Boeing's study portrays the KC-767's smaller size as a statistical strength. For every six KC-330s that could be parked on the ramp, says Boeing, the air force could fit eight KC-767s. The smaller Boeing aircraft could be refuelled on the ground faster, and the KC-330's 60.3m (198ft) wingspan makes it unable to turn on NATO-standard runways. In the air, the KC-767 would consume 19% less fuel, says Boeing.
EADS dismissed all Boeing's points, citing an analysis of 11 staging airfields used by KC-135s during OIF operations. Only 26% of total ramp space was used on average throughout the conflict, rendering the parking concern irrelevant, says EADS, adding that the A330 can turn on NATO-standard runways.
EADS's analysis also contends the KC-330 could offload "59.6 million lb [27.1 million kg] of fuel using 222 sorties", compared with an offload of "59.7 million lb from 278" KC-767 sorties. As for fuel consumption, EADS says the "fuel difference cannot be 19%. Otherwise the A330-200 would not be as successful on the commercial market."
The tit-for-tat arguments became a running joke among other presenters at the event - mainly at Boeing's expense.
Christopher Reid, of the Defence Procurement Agency for the UK Ministry of Defence, joked that the Boeing analysis had him concerned that his office had selected the wrong competitor for the Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft. Royal Air Force Wing Commander Adrian Hayward, meanwhile, suggested, by Boeing's measure, that the Panavia Tornado GR4 is the world's best tanker, as it can turn 180¡ on NATO-standard runways in 6.1m (20ft).
STEPHEN TRIMBLE / JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
Source: Flight International
