U.S. Airforce to fly European tankers
 

Words can't describe how pissed off this makes me. In my opinion, the U.S. military has no business flying European Airbus planes. I realize this is good for Northrop Grumman, but the pentagon had a chance to go with an all-American design and execution and they instead chose to award the $40 BILLION contract to the commercial competitor of America's only real commercial airplane manufacturer. WAY TO GO!


EADS/Northrop upsets Boeing in Air Force tanker competition — analyst

Boeing has lost the long-awaited and lucrative Air Force refueling tanker contract to a competing bid based on an Airbus airplane, a respected and well-connected defense analyst close to the Air Force tanker deal said Friday.

Loren Thompson, an analyst with the Lexington Institute, cited "100 percent reliable" government sources for his information.

The outcome is a shocking upset, kept secret until just before the formal announcement, set for a 2 p.m. press conference today.

The Boeing loss means that the 767 assembly line in Everett will wind to a close around 2012 when the current commercial orders run out.
No layoffs are likely as workers will transfer to other programs. But Washington State has lost out on the chance to add as many as 9,000 jobs.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...nkerwin29.html

You'd rather they fly an American plane even if it means decreased operational ability? Talk about "cutting your nose off to spite your face".

Well, Europeans do have a nasty habit of getting into wars with each other. Let's hope that European peacetime continues throughout the contract. From a strategic standpoint, anytime a country depends on another country for such things, it's asking for trouble.

It had better be a much better aircraft if we are shifting production of a war machine to another continent. Am I the only one who thinks this is a bad idea? I'm also a big fan of keeping jobs (esp. manufacturing) in the US so this bothers me in that regard as well.

The way I hear it Boeing has outsourced thousands of jobs into China now and much of this project was not to be built in the U.S. anyway. Now it will be built in Mobile, AL with American workers. It's a good thing for Alabama's economy.

Good points. Kinda like everyone who puts down people who drive "foreign" cars that are really built in the US.

Or those who drive "US" cars that are made up of almost all foreign made parts.

As someone w/ AL ties who also has several friends who work for NG, I think this is good news. Boeing will live to bid another day, and hopefully next time they'll bring a more competitive design.

Folks are PO'ed in my state - Boeing Central... I dunno how this will work?

I don't know where you heard that, but your source is WRONG. Airbus is the one opening manufacturing facilities in China! To my knowledge, Boeing assembles ALL of its planes here in the U.S., and I know this because I've walked through the factories many times and seen the assembly lines. The aircraft Boeing was going to use for this project has been manufactured in Everett, Wash. for decades, and the planes under this contract would be built there, on that production line. Boeing would have hired 9,000 additional people to add to the production line of that particular plane.

And as far as I've heard, this plane will not be built in the U.S. now. The planes are made by Airbus in FRANCE, and I've heard they will just be flown to Alabama for configuration as needed.

Boeing has a lot of pride in its U.S. manufacturing force. The 787 (the Dreamliner) is the first of its commercial jets to have some parts made overseas (in addition to working with other U.S. partners). Even then, Boeing is flying those pieces to its Everett plant to put it all together along with the parts created in Everett. One of the reasons why it made the decision to have a few pieces of that aircraft made overseas was because many of Boeing's strongest supporters are international airlines! It was a smart business decision and a way of holding on to customers who now have their own source of pride in that aircraft.

When it comes to matters of U.S. defense, yes, I want the Pentagon to choose an American manufacturer, especially one that has a reputation for a quality product AND a history of providing such aircraft to the military. Instead, we're going to give $40-$100 BILLION to a European government-subsidized competitor. Our government essentially just gave as much as $100 BILLION to European governments. Also, supposedly each one of the Boeing tankers in this contract would have cost $35 MILLION less than the Airbus model, which meant a savings of more than $6 billion...or, 50 additional tankers. When you consider the value of the US dollar vs the Euro, the cost difference will amount to even more.

ETA: Articles in papers today are breaking the employment count down to this: N-G will add about 1,500 jobs to its Mobile, Ala. plant, and about 6,000 positions will be created at EADS/Airbus facilities in Europe (primarily France). Compared to the 9,000 jobs Boeing would have added to its plants in the U.S., mainly Everett, Wash.

Um, excuse me, I'm not the U.S. military! This cannot be compared to a family sedan or mini-van. I don't appreciate that our billions of tax dollars are being given to a foreign government to produce something that could have been done VERY well here.

Peppy--

You know our Senators and Representatives are partly to blame here... Apparently there is an appeal process...

I don't like how the Boeing folks are suffering for ignorance and negligence.

Are you in Seattle, AKA Monet? If so, I never realized that! Yes, my mother just retired from Boeing on Friday after 35 years with the company, and my bf is an engineering liaison at the Everett plant. So you could say that I've heard plenty about this and tensions are high.

They only have so much influence. They've met with the decisionmakers on this on several instances, but they're not the ones to make the call. Only folks at the Pentagon are responsible for that.

I am in Redmond... ;)

Tell me this, I am listen to the news and it is our McCord and Bragg has lost all these Stryker Brigades troops... That ENTITLES somebody up here some say in contracts.

Now maybe NG and Airbus can build a better and cheaper plane. But given their track record (i.e. not having one) for this kind of plane, nothing can delete 50 years of building this plane like Boeing pioneered... So, are folks telling me Boeing is gonna want to give up trade secrets?

I know a few engineers... I think there is a gross mistake...

Funny you should mention trade secrets, because Airbus has a history of actually ripping off Boeing's planes. They take Boeing's plans and tweak them slightly to make their own product. Few people know this, but the double-decker plane that Airbus just launched was actually discussed and drawn up at Boeing decades ago...but Boeing rejected that idea in favor of the 787, which they believed was a better solution to airlines' needs. So far, that bet looks to have been the smart one.