Petition the Air Force Tanker Contract

[embraerjetpilot]

Somebody should really question John Mccains involvement in the decision.

I mean really question? what kind of patriot he really is!

 

[dtfl]

http://murray.senate.gov/tankers/index.cfm

FYI there is another link for another senator from AL FOR the tanker.

NEITHER online petition or email chain will make the USAF change their mind.

 

[dtfl]

Don't get me started...

Yes. It is very capable. But at what cost?

When Lockheed was in competition for the contract, Lockheed was offering the C-5D for $180M; much less than the $3-400M per copy that the C-17 has cost the American taxpayer.

The C-5D would have had a 1.5M# GTOW, compared to the C-17's 585,000# GTOW. The C-5D would have burned only slightly more fuel. And short field capability? Not much different. That was a rape of the American people. I have 12 years in the C-5, so yes, I know a little bit about it. I won't denigrate American military capabilities on a public forum, but I do know a bit about the differences between the C-5 and C-17.

Apples to Oranges. The USAF wanted an airlifter that could bridge the gap. They got one. THe C17 is both a strategic and tactical airlifter. It can land on crappy runways in the middle east and still fly around the globe with refueling support. Seems to me they made a good choice.

 

[flyguy75000]

Actually you have it backward. The airbus has more "usability and functionality" because of its FBW control system.

The airplane can be flown right to its limits immediately and held there indefinitely. The Boeing's can not.

Really? Ever been to Jamaica Bay, Queens? Grab your diving gear.......there still may be some evidence of "an airbus flown right to its limits, immmediately."

 

[Mamma]

Don't get me started...

Yes. It is very capable. But at what cost?

When Lockheed was in competition for the contract, Lockheed was offering the C-5D for $180M; much less than the $3-400M per copy that the C-17 has cost the American taxpayer.

The C-5D would have had a 1.5M# GTOW, compared to the C-17's 585,000# GTOW. The C-5D would have burned only slightly more fuel. And short field capability? Not much different. That was a rape of the American people. I have 12 years in the C-5, so yes, I know a little bit about it. I won't denigrate American military capabilities on a public forum, but I do know a bit about the differences between the C-5 and C-17.

You may know the differences but you sure are out in left field on the price of the C-17. As the AF keeps buying them the unit price goes down. We are well below $200 million per copy now. I also think the C-5 would be hard pressed to do the same mission the C-17 does. Then again I don't know what the conversion would have allowed it in terms of capability. Also, I don't think the taxpayer got raped. The C-17 is a great aircraft.

 

[ableone]

Really? Ever been to Jamaica Bay, Queens? Grab your diving gear.......there still may be some evidence of "an airbus flown right to its limits, immmediately."

Cross controlling is a different issue. The Boeing fleet is equally susceptible to this type of failure.

My original statement still holds true. The bus is designed to allow the pilot to select an extreme flightpath with automatic stall protection. The Boeing is not and the pilot is not as free to maneuver as a result.

 

[ableone]

You may know the differences but you sure are out in left field on the price of the C-17. As the AF keeps buying them the unit price goes down. We are well below $200 million per copy now. I also think the C-5 would be hard pressed to do the same mission the C-17 does. Then again I don't know what the conversion would have allowed it in terms of capability. Also, I don't think the taxpayer got raped. The C-17 is a great aircraft.

Keep in mind that the original C-5 contract was not clean.

There were three bidders, lockheed's design never got a higher mark than third.

Lockheed agreed to move production to Georgia and presto their proposal became the best.

The taxpayers have continued to pay for this since the airplane was delivered.

What is the current dispatch reliability of the fleet? Last numbers that I saw were around 50%.

How is that modernization program going? Oh yeah, so over budget and behind schedule that it is in danger of cancellation.

Sooner or later the airforce is going to have to buy more C-17s. They just don't want to admit it because they have a very expensive wish list.

 

[Steveair]

Rallying Against the Tanker Decision​

On March 19, I was joined by Congressman Rick Larsen, Governor Christine Gregoire and leaders from the labor community, together with Boeing workers, their families, and concerned citizens to protest the Air Force's misguided decision to award a $40 billion tanker refueling contract to Airbus.
Over 500 workers crowded into the Machinists Hall in Everett.
I led off the rally, detailing the many reasons why we should not be outsourcing our national security capabilities, particularly at a time when our country is trending towards recession.
This was one of the loudest, most energized rallies that I have ever attended. You could feel the passion and the pride that our 767 team has for their tanker. I spoke with dozens of workers, all echoing the same message: We have the better tanker, we have proven we can provide a quality product, let us do our job.
I agree with them, and will continue working to make sure that in the end we make the right choice for the tanker contract.

Murray's Rally Remarks ​

....................................................................................​

In the News... ​

“Boeing Machinists say tanker decision is 'outsourcing our future” – Everett Herald
“Airbus tanker contract needs more scrutiny” – Tacoma News Tribune
“Air Force hurts itself with tanker contract” – Tri-City Herald

....................................................................................​

If this was forward to you, please join this fight to ensure our economic and military security. Sign up today so that we can keep you involved and informed as the effort moves forw

 

[erj-145mech]

Those workers can have all the pride that they want, but in the end, the taxpayers and the servicemen are getting the best product offered.

There will be a lot of work on the aircraft and components taking place in the US on this aircraft still.

 

[Steveair]

Those workers can have all the pride that they want, but in the end, the taxpayers and the servicemen are getting the best product offered.

There will be a lot of work on the aircraft and components taking place in the US on this aircraft still.

Ohh so the petition worked and Boeing is getting the contract now? You are so far smokin' crack if you think the airbus is the best bang for the buck.