Boeing has released the results of a study it commissioned on the life-cycle cost advantage of the KC-767 vs. the KC-45, this time using a firm we’ve actually heard of and greatly respect: AeroStrategy.
AeroStrategy analyzed 10 scenarios, fuel price escalation, maintenance, and a variety of other factors to conclude that over the life of the program, the KC-767 will cost $11bn-$36bn less than a fleet of KC-45s.
Boeing’s previous use of a company called Conklin-something-or-other was an odd choice, because although we’ve been in commercial aviation since 1979, we had never heard of Conklin. It turned out Conklin was better known for its work in corporate aviation. The AeroStrategy study is far more credible.
We’ve been critical of EADS (and of Northrop before it) for not putting forth its financial analysis. Boeing “owns” this issue and this latest report solidifies its claims.