Why We Won

10 June 2008
Past Performance in Detail
When the Air Force puts a contract up for bid, a contractor's report card on related projects is a key factor in helping the Air Force decide whether the contractor can complete its work on time and on budget. While Boeing argues that its past record in building tankers should make it a clear winner over Northrop Grumman, the Air Force looked at Boeing's track record and concluded exactly the opposite. Because replacing its aging tanker fleet is a top priority for the Air Force, it paid special attention to each company's past record. After doing so, it reached this finding about Boeing's past program management, an important sub-factor in the crucial Past Performance category: "There was a notable difference between the two offerors. Northrop Grumman received a rating of "Satisfactory Confidence," while Boeing received a rating of "Little Confidence."
full article (PDF) >

---

27 May 2008
Fuel Offload
In publishing its Request For Proposal (RFP) for America's next generation of aerial refueling tankers, the Air Force made clear that it was placing a priority on superior refueling capacity, even as it was looking for a more versatile aircraft. In the document in which it explained to both companies why Northrop Grumman's aircraft was superior, the Air Force concluded that Northrop Grumman was better able to pump fuel onto other aircraft - and receive fuel from another aircraft - than Boeing, earning a clear win in this vital evaluation category.
full article (PDF) >

---

19 May 2008
Key Selection Criteria
The Air Force analyzed the competing bids for the KC-X using five factors: Mission Capability, Proposal Risk, Past Performance, Cost/Price, and an Integrated Fleet Air Refueling Assessment (an analysis of tanker performance in a realistic global conflict scenario). Northrop Grumman won in four out of the five categories, and the two companies tied on the fifth (Proposal Risk). That's why the Air Force concluded, as it explained in a document outlining its decision that it provided to both companies, "Northrop Grumman Corporation's proposal offered the best overall value to the government. Northrop Grumman's proposal meets or exceeds the Air Force's requirements, as stated in the Request For Proposal (RFP)."
full article (PDF) >

---

16 May 2008
Strengths and Weaknesses
Boeing likes to claim that its proposed aircraft was rated better than Northrop Grumman's winning KC-45 tanker, stating that it was rated superior to Northrop Grumman on 98 items — called "discriminators" — while Northrop Grumman was superior on 30. But discriminators are not just "added up" — they vary greatly in significance. Instead of focusing on the most important discriminators, Boeing is counting items that the Air Force judged were much less critical to the KC-X's core mobility mission.
full article (PDF) >

---

14 May 2008
Survivability
Survivability is one of the nine key performance criteria established in the Request For Proposal, and the Air Force established a set of over 200 survivability requirements spanning a wide range of threats. Among the requirements: Armor to protect crew members from small arms fire, systems to reduce the risk of fuel tank explosions, long-range threat warning systems with integrated displays, and anti-missile systems designed to thwart surface-to-air missile attacks.
full article (PDF) >

---

12 May 2008
Development and Production Costs
When the Pentagon considers proposals from defense contractors, one of the key elements of its decision is whether the project can come in on time and on budget. Acquisition planners will frequently take cost estimates provided by the prospective contractor and either raise or lower them, based on the U.S. Defense Department's assessment of whether those cost predictions are likely to be accurate.
full article (PDF) >

---

09 May 2008
Fleet Effectiveness
In the KC-X Request for Proposal, the Air Force analyzed each competing aircraft's operational capability as part of its assessment criteria. To do so, the Air Force simulated the operations of a KC-45 and KC-767 fleet in a highly realistic global conflict scenario using a verified and validated Air Force simulation tool. The tankers had to fly missions operating from real-world bases in a range of demanding roles, such as supporting fighter deployments and refueling combat aircraft.
full article (PDF) >

---

07 May 2008
Cost and Price Comparison
Federal contracting law requires the government agency awarding a contract to provide taxpayers with the best value possible. While agencies are allowed to award contracts to a company whose bid price is higher, it must be clear that the more expensive bidder offers a service of significantly higher value.
full article (PDF) >

---

05 May 2008
Past Performance
A contractor's past performance on related projects is a critical element in the Air Force's assessment of competing proposals. Because replacing America's fleet of aerial refueling tankers is the number one acquisition priority for the Air Force, it paid special attention to Boeing's assertions that it could complete the contract on time and on budget. While Boeing likes to claim that it has a better track record than Northrop Grumman in building tankers, the Air Force determined that Boeing's past record actually meant it was riskier to do business with Boeing than Northrop Grumman.
full article (PDF) >

---

02 May 2008
Air Refueling Efficiency
Boeing asserts its 767 aircraft is more fuel efficient than the KC-45. The Air Force found the opposite, concluding that the KC-45 is more fuel efficient.
full article (PDF) >

---

30 Apr 2008
Takeoff Performance
The Air Force concluded that the more capable Northrop Grumman KC-45 featured better takeoff performance. This capability, in combination with the other characteristics of this modern airframe, provides the Air Force with greater basing and operational flexibility than Boeing's proposed KC-767.
full article (PDF) >

---

28 Apr 2008
Greater Range
To ensure maximum refueling flexibility in a wide-ranging battlefield, the Air Force made clear it was seeking an aerial refueling tanker that had the ability to deploy up to 9,500 nautical miles from its take-off base. The Air Force selection document says Northrop Grumman's KC-45 exceeded this threshold. In contrast, Boeing's protest submission indicates the KC-767 failed to meet it.
full article (PDF) >

---

23 Apr 2008
Versatility
The Air Force found Northrop Grumman provides tremendous versatility in its aircraft, including "Better airlift efficiency, cargo capability, pallet capability, passengers and aero-medical capability." Although refueling is the primary mission, the KC-45's excellent mobility capability will provide future commanders with increased operational flexibility.
full article (PDF) >

---

21 Apr 2008
Mission Capability
The Air Force found the Northrop Grumman KC-45 provides "Better fuel offloads at all distances from bases," "Better air refueling efficiency," "Better offload rate and receive rate," and has "A greater boom envelope vs. Boeing."
full article (PDF) >