U.S. Airforce to fly European tankers

[PeppyGPhiB]

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

[RACooper]

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".

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by RACooper

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.

[John]

It seems that many Boeing people are quite upset with John McCain about this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080308/..._force_tankers

From the article:

"Having made sure that Iraq gets new schools, roads, bridges and dams that we deny America, now we are making sure that France gets the jobs that Americans used to have," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill. "We are sending the jobs overseas, all because John McCain demanded it."

Considering the fragile state of the U.S. economy, I'm very surprised at things like this.

Originally Posted by Kevin

From a strategic standpoint, anytime a country depends on another country for such things, it's asking for trouble.

Considering the size of the contract, I wonder if it would be feasible for the U.S. to require EADS/Northrop to open facilities within the U.S. and manufacture those planes here using U.S. workers. That would solve a few of the issues such as keeping the money within the U.S. economy as well as negating any dependence on a foreign country for these things.

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by John

It seems that many Boeing people are quite upset with John McCain about this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080308/..._force_tankers

From the article:


Considering the fragile state of the U.S. economy, I'm very surprised at things like this.



Considering the size of the contract, I wonder if it would be feasible for the U.S. to require EADS/Northrop to open facilities within the U.S. and manufacture those planes here using U.S. workers. That would solve a few of the issues such as keeping the money within the U.S. economy as well as negating any dependence on a foreign country for these things.

Some of the EADS parts are to be producted in US John.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by jon1856

Some of the EADS parts are to be producted in US John.

These are Airbus planes. Airbus builds its planes in France. However, since NG has some components they need to put in these planes, Airbus will build out its plane sections in France, then fly the pieces to Alabama to have them put together. But make no mistake the majority of the work will be done in France, which is the reason why only reportedly 1,500 direct jobs will be created in Alabama.

I still fail to see how this is a good deal for the U.S. taxpayers. These are American tax dollars that could have been spent here in the U.S., not only in the way of jobs, but by the indirect spending/contributions to the economy as a result of those jobs...service industry, housing, AND the government would get some of that tax money back! At least that money would have stayed in this country. If this deal had gone to Boeing, the company would have created 9,000 direct jobs in this country (in Wash., Kansas, Texas, and Conn.) because all of the work would have been done here. Instead, France will get more than 6,000 new jobs and Alabama will get a paltry 1,500.

It still irks me that the Air Force requested a plane the size of the 767 (and didn't want the bigger 777) in the formal RFP, then rejected it because they changed their mind and decided it was too small. Now it sounds like the military will have to change out some of its equipment (at high cost) and policies in order to accommodate the plane that was so heavy and wide that it didn't even meet the requirements of the formal RFP.

[PhiGam]

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.

[Army Wife'79]

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.

[DeltAlum]

Originally Posted by Army Wife'79

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.

[shinerbock]

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.

[AKA_Monet]

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

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

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

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.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

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.

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.

[AKA_Monet]

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.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

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.

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.