Bad day for Boeing

[Falconjet]

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.

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

FJ

 

[PCL_128]

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

FJ

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.

 

[Falconjet]

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.

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

 

[UALjan15]

Yes the Airbus carries more fuel, but it cant use as many airfields as the smaller 767, making it much less versatile.

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.

 

[pipe]

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.

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

 

[bigboeings]

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.

 

[bigboeings]

Based on something you heard on the crew bus? And where exactly did you get your degree in Metallurgy and Fatigue?

This is not hearsay, ask any mechanic who does heavy maintenance on both aircraft. Hands down Boeing has fewer issues on heavy checks.

 

[viper548]

Why didn't Boeing submit a B787 based design for this contract?

 

[erj-145mech]

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?

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.

 

[F/O]

Sweet! New tankers with a sidestick...

 

[freightdogfred]

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.

 

[EMB170Pilot]

Ive been many places where Im delayed for a day or more cause of ramp space on military fields. Bigger isnt always better.

Damn! That's big

 

[climbhappy]

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.

 

[j41driver]

The only good news is that this will force Boeing to close the 767 line and develop its replacement.

I thought the 787 was supposed to be a 767 replacement.