Experts question tanker plan

This is no way to buy airplanes.

That's the consensus of acquisition experts when asked about the U.S. Air Force's latest plan to purchase a new fleet of aerial refueling tankers.

The Pentagon is proposing a winner-take-all competition between Boeing Co. and Northrop Grumman Corp. for the potential $40 billion deal. The plan is to award a fixed-price contract for 179 planes next summer. To strengthen the process against protests, the Air Force has simplified its requirements for the new planes.

Gone are most of the "subjective" criteria that allowed the Air Force to add or subtract points based on the extra features of each plane. As long as the aircraft meet minimum standards, the outcome essentially will turn on price.

While that might be a good way to buy soap, it's a terrible method for choosing something as complex and expensive as a military airplane — particularly one that carries American troops into combat, according to experts.

"The entire focus of this procurement has shifted so that the emphasis is now on avoiding a protest," said

Jacques Gansler , former chief weapons buyer for the Pentagon from 1997 to 2001. "That worries me because you're basically putting the interest of bureaucrats and lawyers ahead of the warfighter."

Gansler said the U.S. has always tried to equip its soldiers with the best products it can reasonably afford. A price shootout, he said, may be easier to defend in court, but it doesn't reward performance or value — factors that any consumer considers when making a big purchase.

Northrop, which is proposing to assemble its KC-30 tankers in Mobile, is howling that the heavy emphasis on price puts it at a distinct disadvantage to Boeing. After Northrop won the first round of competition in 2008, Boeing received details of its winning bid....