Boeing plane's the best choice for U.S. Air Force tanker fleet

The U.S. Air Force is currently deciding whether the Boeing Company's KC-767 Advanced Tanker (AT) or the Airbus A-330 is better to replace its aging fleet of KC-135 aerial refueling tankers. We know which plane is better, because we currently design and build the KC-767.

Here are just a few reasons why the KC-767AT is the best plane to help support our troops and fly missions both at home and abroad.

First and foremost, it just makes sense for the U.S. Air Force to use an American plane. The idea of outsourcing a $40 billion U.S. military aircraft program to the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS), Airbus' parent company, based in France, makes neither national-security nor economic sense. Why hand over some of our most valuable technology to Europe when we should be protecting it and our industrial base here at home?

Then there is the matter of experience. Generations of Boeing engineers, technicians and machinists have worked on military programs. It's part of our heritage and some would even say part of our DNA. We have designed and built 1,000 commercial 767s and nearly 2,000 tankers, and are currently working to deliver four KC-767s to Italy and four to Japan. That's in stark contrast to Airbus, which has never built or flown a tanker and whose KC-30 tanker is years behind the Boeing tanker.

Given the current state of the U.S. economy, taxpayer dollars shouldn't be funding the economic growth of European countries. They should be invested at home. Both the International Association of Machinists (IAM) and the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) have experienced the outsourcing of our jobs overseas because foreign governments wanted "offsets," often in the form of job creation in their country, as part of their agreement for their national airline to purchase Boeing aircraft. Therefore, the U.S. government customer should be no less demanding when it comes to the KC-X tanker. Here's an opportunity to create at least 9,000 jobs here in Washington — and 44,000 jobs nationwide — with the KC-767.

In addition, from a national-security perspective, Americans shouldn't have to have permission from the French government to design, build and maintain our U.S. Air Force's fleet of critically important tankers. The U.S. military and the American citizens it protects should not be put in a position where any foreign government has control over our nation's military capabilities.

America should not put itself at risk of supplies being cut off due to diplomatic disagreements, or subject ourselves to retaliation by foreign governments that may not agree with U.S. foreign policy or any specific military mission. Every day, around the world, we need tankers to support our military.

Finally, this issue isn't just about the current order for tankers, it's about whether Americans or Europeans will produce tankers for the U.S. Air Force for decades to come. The weak U.S. dollar gives additional purchasing power to the U.S. Air Force when procuring an American-made product, compared with a foreign-manufactured product such as an Airbus tanker.

The Boeing KC-767 tanker represents the best product available, using the most advanced avionics and re-fueling capabilities that have been tested during 1,000 hours of flight. We know that it's the best because we design and build it, and we take great pride in our work.

The Washington congressional delegation has done an outstanding job in working to support Boeing's efforts to win the Air Force's ongoing tanker competition. Let members of the delegation know you, too, support America's tanker — the KC-767.