First, it appears that Northrop-Grumman is entitled to an as yet undetermined cancellation fee, which is yet another reason to think that the entire tanker process is completely fracked.

But here is the kicker, Northrop Grumman’s bid was $2.9 billion cheaper:

John Young, the undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, said in an interview at the Pentagon yesterday that under the tanker proposal from Northrop Grumman and its partner European Aeronautic Defence & Space, developing the first 68 aircraft would have cost $12.5 billion, compared with $15.4 billion under Boeing’s plan.

So, the tanker version of the A330 had longer range, greater fuel offload capability, the ability to tank and carry cargo, and it was $2.9 billion cheaper.

Let’s also note that it was already flying, as Australia’s A330 MRTT, as versus Boeing’s proposal, an as yet unconstructed model with, “767-200 airframe; over-wing exits from the -300; floors, doors and structurally enhanced wings from the -300F; a cockpit, and the tail section and flaps from the -400ER”.

Delightful.