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

Boeing loses tanker deal to EADs-Northrop Grumman

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
US lawmakers blast Boeing defense contract snub

US lawmakers have reacted angrily after the US military awarded a 35-billion-dollar aircraft deal to Europe's Northrop Grumman/EADS group, in a major blow to US manufacturers Boeing. "It's stunning to me that we would outsource the production of these airplanes to Europe instead of building them in America," said Republican Senator Sam Brownback about the Pentagon's decision.
"I'll be calling upon the Secretary of Defense for a full debriefing and expect there will be a protest of the award by Boeing."
The US Defense Department announced Friday that it was awarding the deal for a fleet of in-flight refuelling craft to the Northrop Grumman/EADS team, in a huge coup for Boeing's main rival Airbus.
The surprise choice of EADS marks the European group's entry into the lucrative US defense market, where so far it had had only a marginal presence.
Boeing voiced strong disappointment after the contract slipped through its hands and said it would ask for an explanation.
"Once we have reviewed the details behind the award, we will make a decision concerning our possible options," said Boeing spokesman William Barksdale, hinting at a possible protest.
While European political and industry leaders have hailed the decision, many Republicans have been left seething.
"We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers," said Republican Representative Todd Tiahrt.
"I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."

Boeing, the second leading US defense contractor after Lockheed Martin, had been considered the heavy favorite for the contract and according to its website is the largest employer in Kansas.
The contract for the newly named tanker, the KC-45, is one of the largest Pentagon contracts in recent years and the first order on a tanker market valued at more than 100 billion dollars in more than 30 years.
Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), parent of Airbus, will provide up to 179 tankers for the US Air Force.
"The tanker is the number-one procurement priority for us right now. It is the first step in our critical commitment to recapitalize our aging fleet to move, supply, and position assets anywhere," said General Duncan McNab, US Air Force chief of staff, in a statement.
The stunning victory for EADS comes as group CEO Louis Gallois seeks to build up its presence in the defense sector, judged to be less cyclical than civil aeronautics.
Gallois told AFP the contract was a "great subject of pride" for the company and would "encourage it to pursue its strategy in the United States."
A spokesman for French President Nicolas Sarkozy said he had called Gallois "to pay homage to this historic success."
"He is delighted that after recent difficulties, EADS has come back brilliantly with record orders, particularly in one of the most difficult and demanding defense markets in the world," said David Martinon in a statement.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a statement, called the deal "an immense success for Airbus and for the European aerospace industry."
Airbus will assemble the tankers in Mobile, Alabama, and has vowed to transfer assembly of its commercial 330 aircraft there, creating jobs.
Republican Alabama Senator Richard Shelby welcomed the decision. "Not only is this the right decision for our military, but it is great news for Alabama," he said.
The contract was expected to bring up to 1,800 jobs to the Mobile area and 5,000 to the state, he added.
Boeing and the EADS-Northrop team had been competing for more than a year for the prize, which offers a cushion for decades in case of a downturn in the highly cyclical market for commercial aircraft.
EADS's winning offer is a modified version of the Airbus 330. The commercial plane will be militarized by Northrop Grumman and its American partners to prevent the transfer of sensitive technology to a foreign entity.
Boeing had proposed a version of its long-haul cargo plane, the 767-200.
In May 2003, a similar tanker contract was awarded to Boeing, but it was annulled under allegations of procurement fraud, for which Boeing paid a record 615-million-dollar settlement to the government.
 
So, the contest was to find out which airplane
was "More American" or to find out which airplane
was better suited for the job?

I know a good deal of Spaniards, Germans, and
Britts that would like a word with you about this
"Frog" plane.

CE
 
Answer Yip's question CE. Will the Bus last 50 years?

Your ass would be the first to gripe about how Bush is making all the jobs go overseas in the Non-Av forum, what gives?
 
Answer Yip's question CE. Will the Bus last 50 years?

Your ass would be the first to gripe about how Bush is making all the jobs go overseas in the Non-Av forum, what gives?

How long was the 707 supposed to last?
Were they REALLY supposed to last 50 years?
I think not.

It WILL bring jobs to the USA. Last I checked,
Northrop still is an American company.

If size was a problem, why didn't they offer the
777 or 787? Why was there corruption with the
first bid.

I don't know how well the 'Bus is constructed, but
the USA government saw fit to choose Airbus,
take it up with them.

And please skip the "buy 'merican" argument.
It was tired in the 80's and 90's. As for parts, that's
just another tired argument. In an emergency, I'm
sure we can manufacture any part necessary.
It's a freakin A330!!!!

Boeing isn't a struggling mom and pop store being
put out of business by Walmart. They are "Big
Business" and would hire and fire 10,000 just to
pretty up the books, just like Airbus and any other
large company.

I'm sick of the Boeing (and Airbus) fanboys touting
their favorite companies like a Kirk -vs- Picard
argument. It's sad, no one cares, get a life.

CE
 
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 anti-French "Frog" crap is stupid. No, I'm not French nor am I a Francophile. It's just stupid.
 
Boeing was not competing with another company, but with a company heavily subsidized by a foreign government; subsidized to the point that profitability is not required for new projects. Look at what happened to the A380, if it wasn't for the government subsidization, the whole company would of folded a few years ago. The A380 will never be profitable for EADS, but it doesn't have to be.
 
And Boeings NOT subsidized ??!!??
 
any one think the 330 will have a service life of 50 years like the 135?
Not even close! Airbus is looking into DOUBLING the life expectancy of the A320 series to 120,000hrs?
Built to stand the test of time...as long as it's not over 60,000hrs. I am sure Airbus can come in as the lowest bidder every time with their government subsidies.

I really don't think Capitol Hill will approve the money for this, not with the way the economy is in the crapper. Stick with the home team.

As for someone mentioning why Boeing did not propose the 777, Boeing was discouraged from offering it by the military.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2004262503_webtankerids05.html
 

Latest resources

Back
Top