Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Bad day for Boeing

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
Components and parts for Boeing's planes are made in 5 different continents anyway. Foreign contractors could cut us off either way. This is a simple case of the Pentagon choosing what they thought was a better design. Some win and some lose.

Perhaps Boeing didn't bribe enough Generals like they have in the past.

BTW; This mindless anti-French "Frog" crap is stupid. No, I'm not French nor am I a Francophile. It's just stupid.
 
One thing is for certain. In 50 years those 330,s will be on the scrap heap. Boeings are a superior built aircraft.
 
bigboeings said:
One thing is for certain. In 50 years those 330,s will be on the scrap heap. Boeings are a superior built aircraft.
Click to expand...

Maybe in that time, Boeing can come up with a better design than a rehashed, too small, flutter-prone 767.

If the KC-45 does a better job of providing our aircrews and troops with support, then that is what I want.

I wish it was a Boeing, too.
 
LJDRVR said:
I'm still upset about us awarding a contract to an American Company that is selling a foreign designed and built airplane...
Click to expand...

So how do you feel about the current T-6A/B Texan II?

That came out of the JPATS program in the early '90's and it's the Pilatus PC-9. So that's a Swiss aircraft being used by the Air Force even though it's now being license-built by Raytheon. And if you research the JPATS competition, you'll note that nearly all of the contenders were foreign-designed aircraft that were being offered in "partnership" with various US manufacturers.
 
erj-145mech said:
And the ATR is built where?
Click to expand...

It's build in Tolouse, but then again, we're not talking about an ATR, we are talking about a tanker fleet for our military. Where is your ERJ built?
 
Here's a novel thought, Airbus's offering was simply a better product. More fuel, more capacity, more advanced avionics. The 767 was designed in the 70's.

If I'm escorting a heavy division that needs gas, what do you think I care about - what company built the tanker or how much gas is available for me and my boys?
 
PCL_128 said:
I don't care where some of the parts are built, Boeing is an American company and Airbus is not. This is a disgrace. The American military flying around a bunch of French airplanes. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
The problem is that Boeing couldn't play fairly and they got caught - this ruined their chances from that moment forward. In other words, they had Corp Greed and it caught up with them.

I believe if they would have bid fairly they would have won this contract - but they didn't, got caught and now they are seeing the results of their actions.
 
Yes the Airbus carries more fuel, but it cant use as many airfields as the smaller 767, making it much less versatile.
 
question: why would you need to be concerned about airliefds when the mission is fueling in the air?

read the WSJ article: airbus was a better value apples to apples,

but I would have gone to boeing and said what can you guys do to lower the price and make the price adjusted contract more in line with lesser value airplane as far as payload, fuel and passengers .
they could have gotten it done.
 
Falconjet said:
So PCL, I'm going to guess Canadian since you won't answer the question.

FJ
Click to expand...
Sorry, missed the question. Some Chryslers are built in the US by UAW workers. Mine was built in Canada by CAW workers, which is the Canadian branch of the UAW. My only concern when purchasing a car is that it's made by union labor. Some Toyotas are even built by UAW workers.
 
You know I just have to comment on this thread and all the others with regard to foreign ownership, open skies, mergers with growth opportunities, etc.

We as pilots are not too bothered to be "benefitting" from all this international expansion, flying new routes to China, India and wherever else. I would like to pose a question for all to ponder:

Do you think these planes are full of tourists going to China to take pictures of the Great Wall, going to India to marvel at the Taj Mahal, to Europe to backpack around the EU, etc., etc.? Are they full of foreigners yearning to come to America to see the Statue of Liberty, go to NASCAR races, spend lots of money in our tourist stuff, etc., etc.?

Some, maybe. Most are traveling around the world engaging in a "global economy", and we are none too happy to be earning a living ENABLING it.

I'm not defending it or taking a position here. Just asking for all of us to stop and think a minute about what we do before bashing all these deals and policies.

"We have met the enemy and he is us" - Pogo
 
PCL_128 said:
Sorry, missed the question. Some Chryslers are built in the US by UAW workers. Mine was built in Canada by CAW workers, which is the Canadian branch of the UAW. My only concern when purchasing a car is that it's made by union labor. Some Toyotas are even built by UAW workers.
Click to expand...

So if the Frogs who build the Bus tanker are in a union are you ok with them?

FJ
 
Falconjet said:
So if the Frogs who build the Bus tanker are in a union are you ok with them?

FJ
Click to expand...
No, labor laws are actually very good in France. I don't have an issue with that. In fact, I have no problem with private companies in America buying Airbuses. I personally don't like them, and I hope my airline never buys any, but that's just a personal preference. This is different, though. This is the United States military flying aircraft that are produced by a foreign company. Private industry is one thing. The military is a whole different animal.
 
PCL_128 said:
No, labor laws are actually very good in France. I don't have an issue with that. In fact, I have no problem with private companies in America buying Airbuses. I personally don't like them, and I hope my airline never buys any, but that's just a personal preference. This is different, though. This is the United States military flying aircraft that are produced by a foreign company. Private industry is one thing. The military is a whole different animal.
Click to expand...

Ok, so we can buy foreign, just not the military. I got it.

Not sure I agree, but what the hey.

I spent my entire military flying career flying a French made jet (see pic), so I don't think the world will end if the AF buys a few also.

Would I have liked to see Boeing win the contract?

You bet, but it doesn't sound like they earned it, so they lost out. Hopefully they will learn from this and put up a better product/bid package next time.

If we start buying offensive weapons from foreigners I would worry, as we will have much bigger problems if/when that happens.

FJ
 
bigboeings said:
Yes the Airbus carries more fuel, but it cant use as many airfields as the smaller 767, making it much less versatile.
Click to expand...

We don't exactly run tanker ops out of remote forward airfields. Everywhere I've seen tankers operate from has 10K of runway or more. Your premise that a smaller tanker = better performance is flawed. It's all about the thrust. I worked the frag shop for 3 months in the desert, and it was the KC-135s, not the KC-10s, that limited everything.

I'm no tanker pilot, but I think I am still in a fair position to rank tanker versatility (in order of most importance):
  1. Fuel
  2. Lots of fuel
  3. Did I mention the importance of fuel?
  4. Booms AND baskets for offload
  5. Good T/O and reject performance (allows you to load more...you guessed it...fuel!)
  6. Cargo capacity and flexibility
  7. Passenger capacity
  8. Slows down enough to stay with the Hog
I guess the brand name "Boeing" didn't make it onto my list, though I do wish they had brought a worthy competitor to the fight.
 
PCL_128 said:
No, labor laws are actually very good in France. I don't have an issue with that. In fact, I have no problem with private companies in America buying Airbuses. I personally don't like them, and I hope my airline never buys any, but that's just a personal preference. This is different, though. This is the United States military flying aircraft that are produced by a foreign company. Private industry is one thing. The military is a whole different animal.
Click to expand...

You know, your argument cuts both ways. In the private sector you don't have people trying to kill you at work. When you have people shooting at you, the only thing you care about is that you have the BEST equipment. If I'm getting shot at and the best flak jacket is from Venezuela, then I want to be wearing one.

Apparently this Airbus tanker is also an AWACS. That means that when they're dragging a bunch of fighters through a dangerous area, the "mother ship" will be passing huge amounts of very helpful info along to the fighters.

In the end, when you're fighting to the death, you must win at all costs.

PIPE
 
Hopefully they will put more powerful engines on the tanker version. The passenger one is so underpowered its scary. Ramp space is also an issue, Ive been many places where Im delayed for a day or more cause of ramp space on military fields. Bigger isnt always better.
 
Last edited:
atrdriver said:
It's build in Tolouse, but then again, we're not talking about an ATR, we are talking about a tanker fleet for our military. Where is your ERJ built?
Click to expand...

You're the one bitchin on the military flying French airplanes, while you are flying French built airplanes, a bit of irony there, don't you think?

I'm not on the EMB's any longer, traded them in a few years ago for North American T-2's and T-39s, made in Columbus, OH and St Louis, MO, thank you very much.

I'm too cheap to spend $10 to change my screen name.
 
Sweet! New tankers with a sidestick...
 
Well, I ain't got a dog in this fight cause I fly a Mc Douglas, but I will say my crash pad car, a 1998 Ford Taurus is the biggest piece of $hit ever made on this planet.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
 
boeing has enough troubles with the 787 line. they got their pride back with the 787 and smashed airbus. this is just a blow in a long protracted fight for global supremacy in mfg'ing.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom