Asking the Pentagon Why they Didn't Pick the Safest Possible Tanker for the American Warfighter

Last Wednesday, I asked why the Air Force did not choose the aerial refueling tanker that scored higher in protecting its crew in a speech on the Senate floor. Airbus's tanker scored lower than Boeing's KC-767 in the contract competition in the critical category of "survivability" which measures the aircrafts ability to identify and avoid threats and to protect the crew in the event of an attack.  -

"Compared to Boeing’s 767, Airbus’s tanker is massive – it’s much bigger than the Air Force originally requested and its size is problematic for many reasons."

"Not only are there fewer places Airbus’s tanker can take off and land – but as a larger plane, it is a bigger target and easier to hit.  The KC-767 is more agile, and it’s safer for the crews and the aircraft they are refueling."  

“Americans want our warfighters flying the safest possible planes.  So I’m asking today – why wouldn’t the Pentagon?"

More  

Last week, I and Senators Pat Roberts (R-KS), Sam Brownback (R-KS), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) wrote a letter to the Joint Chiefs of Staff to express our concern that the recent KC-X contract was not awarded to the refueling tanker that is "safest, most survivable, and most effective for the American warfighter."

....................................................................................

In the News...

“Murray asks good questions about tanker” – Everett Herald

....................................................................................

If this was forward to you, please join this fight to ensure our economic and military security. Sign up today so that we can keep you involved and informed as the effort moves forward.