BARKSDALE: The 777 as a tanker is just so much more capable than anything it's got as a peer. And I know that sounds like a bit of bravado, but if you really get down to it, if they really value what you would call a large airplane - a widebody tanker -- and everything that goes with it, that 777 is amazing. I'll give you a couple of examples. If you compare them, the 777 would provide - deliver - however you want to say it -- 23% more fuel than the KC-30. It could carry 44% more payload - more cargo - in the back. And it also would carry about 42% more passengers in the back as well. So those are very generic, very general kinds of numbers. There's a lot more data we could get into at some point down the line. ... If the air force really wants to go in that direction, the Boeing company has spent a lot of time in the last year preparing for that, knowing that we have a real, true, large tanker that, like I said, is comparable in size to the KC-30. And, yet, you get you get so much more for your money.
Boeing: KC-777 'so much better' than KC-30
Addison Schonland of the IAG blog has a great podcast interview today with Boeing tanker spokesman Bill Barksdale. If you wondered if Boeing is really interested in a 777-based tanker, Barksdale's new interview should dispel any doubts. Yes, Bill says, Boeing may still offer a 767-based tanker if US Air Force wants something smaller and more agile. But Bill seemed much more enthusiastic about the prospect of a KC-777. He also threw out some interesting new statistics. I have an excerpt below, but check out Schonland's blog to hear the podcast (fee required).
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Boeing: KC-777 'so much better' than KC-30.
TrackBack URL for this entry: