Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
It's (almost) Official: A330-200F To Build In USA  
User currently offlineObserver From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 78 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 13542 times:

The Mobile Press-Register reports today that Airbus will build the A330-200F in Mobile, AL, if Northrop wins the KC-45A tanker contest over Boeing.

http://www.al.com/news/press-registe...e/news/1200046507297000.xml&coll=3

112 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12280 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 13425 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So, the only thing stopping the A332F being built in Mobile is the small matter of the USAF selecting the KC-30?  scratchchin 

That's almost a done deal then!  duck 



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6747 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 13378 times:



Quoting Observer (Thread starter):
Airbus will build the A330-200F in Mobile, AL,

If I were Mobile, Alabama.. I wouldn't look at this as a possibility.. it's going to go to Boeing..



Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineWildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2594 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 13331 times:

With the strong Euro wouldn't be better for Airbus to build the A332F in Mobile anyway?

User currently offlineHelvknight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 13242 times:

It'll also cause confusion with that little bit of protectionism on the safety card, especially if they also use the line to take up some slack on the pax version

"Final assembly of this airplane was completed in France. Or maybe the US. You never know your luck"


User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 13148 times:



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 1):
That's almost a done deal then!

Nice to see that someone sees the hope of the area.

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 2):
it's going to go to Boeing..

The Northrop/Airbus offering is far superior to the Boeing offering. It is true that many in the miliary are reluctant to buy a French name plane, but it will be built in Mobile and have an international proportion similar to the Boeing offering.


User currently offlineMSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6514 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12966 times:

I know a couple of people in the USAF (pilots) and they have told me, point blank, that the order is Boeing's to lose. Take that for what it's worth, but I trust these guys.

User currently onlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4104 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12968 times:



Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 6):
The Northrop/Airbus offering is far superior to the Boeing offering.

Can you please explain how an aircraft as large as the A330 is a better replacement for the KC-135 than the 762? The USAF isn't replacing KC-10s (yet), they don't need the extra crew/cargo transport capacity or range that the KC-330 would offer. There's also the slight issue of parking them...


User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12897 times:



Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 10):
There's also the slight issue of parking them...

Not really. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the wingspans are within 25 feet of each other. Is that really a big deal?

Also, the Air Force said that they are using a point system to evaluate the planes, and they intend to pick the best value. It is also relevant that Boeing was caught in a conspiracy for this very replacement project, leading to a new competition and Northrop's/Airbus's entry.

(I'm no military expert and I focus more on the airline business, but I have personal interest in this as I am from MOB - I understand that I may be completely wrong.)


User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12897 times:

After all , where is the problem if the KC30 is selected by USAF , and if it is built in USA ?
It will be an American product, even if it has "rolled out" of French brains , among others.
33% of an European built A330 is American.
This is only a matter of pride.......


When the US Navy selected the Goshawk T45 there were no problem at all , even if it was an English product.
This plane was built in USA , and every body was happy.

USAF will be stupid not to select the KC30 if it will perform better than the KC767 at a cheap price.
If they select the KC767 at a high price , which is oldest and probably less competitive than the KC30 , American tax payers will have some reason to blame their government.........

I must also add than the French AF will soon send an RFP to both Airbus and Boeing , in order to acquire 11 tankers to replace the KC135s.Yes this market is far smaller , but they will be also competition here.


User currently offlineAirTranTUS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12851 times:

I think the order will be 50/50, unless Ron Paul gets elected, and it will go all-Boeing.

User currently offlineBlueFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3901 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12790 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 12):
Also, the Air Force said that they are using a point system to evaluate the planes

And that doesn't mean anything unless we know on what basis the points are awarded. It's very easy to claim impartiality because the decision will be based on point totals, and turn around and skew both the features/specs/characteristics over which points are awarded and the number of points awarded to foregone a certain outcome.

"1000 points question: Is the plane made by Boeing?"



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12442 times:

Sorry if I sound stupid,

But lets see if I've gotten my facts straight as I haven't been following this topic.

Northrop has teamed up with Airbus to design an aircraft that can take over the KC-135 (707) tankers' job?

Northrop and Airbus are offering the A330-200 as the variant?

Boeing is offering a 777 tanker?

What are the pros/cons of both versions of a tanker?

Needs to be 767 sized? 777 too large?

Why is Boeing losing the deal to Airbus?

Sorry, just need to get up to speed...

Thanks,

UAL


User currently offlineA350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1100 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12348 times:



Quoting Observer (Thread starter):
The Mobile Press-Register reports today that Airbus will build the A330-200F in Mobile, AL, if Northrop wins the KC-45A tanker contest over Boeing.

They should even go farther than that and
- built the A330-200F in Mobile anyway
- move the remaining pax aircraft to Mobile, too, once the A350 line is set up

This will both help to cope with the high Euro and improve the chance to get the tanker deal

Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Reply 13):
After all , where is the problem if the KC30 is selected by USAF , and if it is built in USA ?
It will be an American product, even if it has "rolled out" of French brains , among others.
33% of an European built A330 is American.
This is only a matter of pride.......

One question: will Airbus license the spare parts to Northrop? This will remove any hypothetical risk of depency from foreign spare parts. And why not give the civil spare part business to them, too?

Cheers

A350



Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12266 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting Thorben (Reply 11):
Does Boeing pay taxes in the US?

Thorben, with all due respect, google "boeing income statement". You will see that Boeing do pay taxes. If you still can not find it, please click on the link and peruse the income statement at your leisure, published by Reuters: Income Statement - Boeing Company



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3854 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12225 times:



Quoting A350 (Reply 19):
They should even go farther than that and
- built the A330-200F in Mobile anyway
- move the remaining pax aircraft to Mobile, too, once the A350 line is set up

This will both help to cope with the high Euro and improve the chance to get the tanker deal

What would that accomplish? Sure, it might make financial sense in the short term, but what about when the dollar rebounds - suddenly you are in the same boat, just the dollar is the issue now...

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 18):

Northrop has teamed up with Airbus to design an aircraft that can take over the KC-135 (707) tankers' job?

Correct.

Quote:

Northrop and Airbus are offering the A330-200 as the variant?

The initial offering is based on the A330-200, Northrop have said they will move the base design to the A330-200F if their bid is successful.

Quote:

Boeing is offering a 777 tanker?

No, they are offering the 767 as a tanker.

Quote:

What are the pros/cons of both versions of a tanker?

Thats a very complex question.

Quote:

Needs to be 767 sized? 777 too large?

One of Boeings arguments is that a 777 sized tanker to replace a 707 sized tanker is too large, and thus the A330 is too large. The counter argument is that the A330 offering provides extra benefits because of its size.

Quote:

Why is Boeing losing the deal to Airbus?

They haven't (yet), its still hotly contested with an announcement at the end of the month.


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 16, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12175 times:



Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 12):
It is also relevant that Boeing was caught in a conspiracy for this very replacement project, leading to a new competition and Northrop's/Airbus's entry.

It wasn't exactly a conspiracy, it was a conflict of interest. The procurement agent at the USAF, and members of her family, were offered jobs at Boeing. The assumption was that this was done in order to grease the wheels for an arrangement for the USAF to lease 767 tankers from Boeing.

Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Reply 13):
USAF will be stupid not to select the KC30 if it will perform better than the KC767 at a cheap price.

The KC30, per unit, costs more than the KC767. "It will perform better" is too broad of a question. The KC767 is better at some things, the KC30 is better at others. The USAF will decide how they want to weight the pros and cons of each.

Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Reply 13):
If they select the KC767 at a high price , which is oldest and probably less competitive than the KC30 , American tax payers will have some reason to blame their government.........

They won't select it at a high price. It's also not as old as you might think...most of the guts of a KC767 are based on the 767-400ER, which is similar vintage to the A330.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 18):

Northrop has teamed up with Airbus to design an aircraft that can take over the KC-135 (707) tankers' job?

Northrop and Airbus are offering the A330-200 as the variant?

Yes.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 18):
Boeing is offering a 777 tanker?

No.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 18):
What are the pros/cons of both versions of a tanker?

KC30 pros: Larger (carries more fuel, more cargo, more people), newer design and systems
KC30 cons: Larger (more ramp space, more fuel burn, bigger hangers), more expensive (less units overall or more $$$)
KC767 pros: Smaller (less ramp space, less fuel burn, smaller hangers), cheaper (more booms in the air or less $$$), larger spares pool
KC767 cons: Smaller (less fuel, less cargo, less people), older design and systems

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 18):
Needs to be 767 sized? 777 too large?

The 777 is too big for what the USAF says they want.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 18):
Why is Boeing losing the deal to Airbus?

They're not, yet.

Tom.


User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9255 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12145 times:



Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 5):
The Northrop/Airbus offering is far superior to the Boeing offering. It is true that many in the miliary are reluctant to buy a French name plane, but it will be built in Mobile and have an international proportion similar to the Boeing offering.

prove this please?

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 7):
Can you please explain how an aircraft as large as the A330 is a better replacement for the KC-135 than the 762? The USAF isn't replacing KC-10s (yet), they don't need the extra crew/cargo transport capacity or range that the KC-330 would offer. There's also the slight issue of parking them...

there is also talk of a KC777

Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Reply 9):
After all , where is the problem if the KC30 is selected by USAF , and if it is built in USA ?

where was it made(as designed)(answer=France which=alot of pissed off Americans

Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Reply 9):
If they select the KC767 at a high price , which is oldest and probably less competitive than the KC30 , American tax payers will have some reason to blame their government.........

again 100% American made 20% American made who do you think will win

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 14):
Boeing is offering a 777 tanker?

the is talk of a KC777

guys even if the plane is made in MOB the money goes to France which is why it will be Boeing



yep.
User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12030 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 16):
It wasn't exactly a conspiracy, it was a conflict of interest.

A conflict on interest that successfully enables Boeing to inflate the lease rate of the aircraft certainly sounds like a conspiracy to me.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 17):
prove this please?

See this chart:
Big version: Width: 683 Height: 726 File size: 1455kb


The notes to the spider chart are located in the appendix of this study regarding the tankers:
http://www.leeham.net/filelib/ScottsColumn090407.pdf

It's an interesting, nonpartisan read.


User currently offlineR2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2552 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12026 times:

You have to be careful with the wording here. What does "build" mean? Assemble? I doubt it. The logistics of having a full A330 assembly line in Mobile would be madness. With the A340 line drying up and the passenger A330 to eventually disappear once 787s are sufficiently available, Airbus could still keep the TLS line alive for years by producing freighters, just like with the A300.

Does "build" mean Green-to-Freighter? Or maybe Passenger-to-Freighter? Or Green-to-Tanker? I think yes. This would be in line with what has been said about the KC30: build the A332F in TLS, ferry it green to Mobile, and do the tanker work there. It would make perfect sense to have an integrated G2F, P2F and G2T facility in Mobile.

...ifff and only ifff EADS wins the tanker contract, which I consider unlikely...


User currently offlineKensukeAida From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 217 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11978 times:



Quoting Observer (Thread starter):
The Mobile Press-Register reports today that Airbus will build the A330-200F in Mobile, AL, if Northrop wins the KC-45A tanker contest over Boeing.

Airbus doesn't have a choice if they want to have any prayer in hell of winning. That's how nearly ALL foreign designed US military contracts have been awarded. Italian Beretta pistols (M9) were made in the US. British BAE Hawk (T-45) trainers and AV-8 Harriers were licensed built by MacDoug in the US. I'm sure there's a number of others I'm forgetting....

- John


User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11944 times:



Quoting KensukeAida (Reply 20):
Airbus doesn't have a choice if they want to have any prayer in hell of winning. That's how nearly ALL foreign designed US military contracts have been awarded. Italian Beretta pistols (M9) were made in the US. British BAE Hawk (T-45) trainers and AV-8 Harriers were licensed built by MacDoug in the US. I'm sure there's a number of others I'm forgetting....

I believe that there is a significant misunderstanding among several members regarding the production of the aircraft. Northrop/EADS have always planned to build the aircraft in Mobile. That was announced from the outset of the entry. This new plan is build COMMERCIAL CARGO airplanes IN ADDITION to the military tankers, provided they win the contract.


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11899 times:



Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 8):
It is also relevant that Boeing was caught in a conspiracy for this very replacement project,

No it isn't. Last time I looked, Boeing wasn't subject to any government contracting restrictions.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 16):
KC30 pros: Larger (carries more fuel, more cargo, more people), newer design and systems

Larger fuel load is irrelevant. Right now, the average KC-135 mission never results in the delivery of its entire fuel load.


User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11801 times:



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 22):
No it isn't. Last time I looked, Boeing wasn't subject to any government contracting restrictions.

Whether it is or is not officially relevant to the Air Force, is not challenged. It is most definitely relevant to this discussion, however.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 24, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 11542 times:



Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 3):
With the strong Euro wouldn't be better for Airbus to build the A332F in Mobile anyway?

Why not transfer the entire A330 program as well?  Wink

Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Reply 9):
I must also add than the French AF will soon send an RFP to both Airbus and Boeing ,

I would be surprised if Boeing sent them more than a link to their website. Anything more would be a wasted effort.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 12):
Boeing is offering a 777 tanker?

No, for the KC-X competition they are only offering the KC-767.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 12):
What are the pros/cons of both versions of a tanker?

Tdscannuck gave a good summary, but we have a quarter billion or so threads on Mil-Av that get into the details....

Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 18):
See this chart:

Which doesn't show the net loss of jobs in the U.S. This whole order will hinge on politics, as it should. After all, either entry can do the job.

Quoting R2rho (Reply 19):
You have to be careful with the wording here. What does "build" mean? Assemble? I doubt it. The logistics of having a full A330 assembly line in Mobile would be madness.

Thank you for your clarity.

Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 21):
believe that there is a significant misunderstanding among several members regarding the production of the aircraft. Northrop/EADS have always planned to build the aircraft in Mobile.

Please see above.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
25 Post contains links MOBflyer : Why madness? EADS has a significant and growing presence in the Mobile Area. The Airbus Engineering Center and maintenance facilities at Mobile Regio
26 FlagshipAZ : From what I know, if the A330 wins the USAF contract...the first 4 aircraft were to be assembled in France, then flown to Mobile for fitting out. Then
27 AirNZ : Sorry, but I'm not getting your 'argument' here at all. If either is made in US how is either not 100% American-made??? Are you seriously suggesting
28 MOBflyer : Your numbers are slightly skewed. While Boeing claims that its tanker is 85% America and refuses to disclose its methodology, Northrop, who did discl
29 Viscount724 : A330-200 wingspan is about 42 ft greater than the 767-200, and the 332 is about 35 ft longer. That means the 332 takes up 40% more ramp space than th
30 Flybyguy : Boeing screwed up big-time with the first loss of the 767 tanker contract. However, it WILL get the contract simply because it's good for Boeing, an A
31 Post contains images Lightsaber : First, it would be great news for Mobile if the production were to be moved there. Very interesting. Thank you. Are you sure? Northrop almost withdrew
32 Okie73 : he is right, larger fuel load is irrelevant. The larger cost per unit will kill the KC-30. The KC-30 could carry 5 times the fuel of the KC-767, but
33 Trex8 : true, they just had to cough up over $600 million in fines to the government instead! obviously there was no fault on Boeings part, they just like to
34 Post contains links Scbriml : KC-X is for a fixed number of planes. The USAF gets the same number of booms whichever plane it selects. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-767
35 DeltaL1011man : were will the parts be made please read below note France parts + put together in MOB=not American made sorry no little made in USA sticker for these
36 MOBflyer : While they are in an intense competition, I can only wonder why Northrop was the only of the two to release their methodology.
37 Post contains images Glideslope : OK,
38 Trex8 : something like 10% of the 767 is made in Japan in case you didn't know. The wings of the A330 are from the UK (you know that horrible ex colonial pow
39 Par13del : I trust no American takes this the wrong way, but what is wrong with the US tax payors spending their tax dollars to buy an American product from an A
40 OldAeroGuy : Unless you are one of the Americans in Wichita or Everett who are laid off when the 767 line closes down if the A330 wins the KC-X contract. Why do y
41 MOBflyer : I do not think that any paying job or any person is miniscule. I also was unaware that Boeing was facing layoffs in the event that they did not win t
42 Post contains images Lightsaber : But so would the congressional delegates for Alabama, Texas, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Florida who will lose jobs if Northrop doesn't win. Its going
43 Tdscanuck : Conspiracy implies a conscious and coordinated effort to cover up the truth. The lease rate of the aircraft was public from day one and it's not like
44 KensukeAida : I stand corrected. Here's an interesting thought though based on my example of foreign designed military aircraft being licensed built in the United
45 WildcatYXU : Oh, there is nothing wrong with it. But an average American doesn't give a damn about it when spending the money that left after taxes. So why would
46 Xtoler : AB Industries: Alabama Built.... Roll Tide!!!!!!!!! Can't help this one and I haven't even read the whole thread yet. Where is the M-class Mercedes bu
47 Halls120 : It's only an advantage if it is needed. And it isn't. The Air Force needs more booms in the air, not larger fuel tanks in the air.
48 KC135TopBoom : When you have to park 20 airplanes on a small ramp, yes the extra 25' wingspan makes a difference. First, the KC-135 is not a B-707. Yes, NG/EADS is
49 Baron52ta : Might I just say that the KC 30 is supposed to be able to refuel up to 3 planes at a time therefore requiring less flying, but the USAF types wouldn't
50 KensukeAida : Actually if you know anything about military procurement, you'd know that there is a syndrome called NIH ("Not Invented Here"). It's killed a number
51 Tdscanuck : The big advantage, in concept, was *vastly* lower up front cost and concurrently higher acquisition rate. The USAF was strapped for cash thanks to th
52 Xtoler : Remember during the mid '70's with the YC14 and YC19. Both aircraft flew and at least the Boeing YC19 demo'd out of Mannheim AAF. Carter cut it, Reag
53 Post contains images Astuteman : Yuo're saying that Europe's submission to the WTO was right, then? Nice post. Because that's supposed to be the "Great American Way"? At least that's
54 Post contains images F27Friendship : All airplanes are paid for in dollars, however the majority of the costs are in Euro's. Despite the exchange rate (which is generating extra losses n
55 KensukeAida : Frankly, I always felt the argument was idiotic both ways. Airbus is subsidized by members of the EU. Boeing is subsidized by the US government (alth
56 MD-90 : Why? Wouldn't a Paul administration want the best plane at the best price that fits the needs of the USAF? He is an Austrian economist after all. Of
57 Scbriml : So now it's "booms on the ground"? The USAF will get precisely the number of booms they want even if they select the KC-30. If larger fuel offloading
58 Trex8 : odd as in B57 Canberra, AV8 Harrier, C23 Sherpa, C27 Spartan, T45 Goshawk,T3Firefly, T6 Texan,UH72 Lakota and soon the VH71?? ain't nothing odd about
59 KensukeAida : Paul is a classical Libertarian. He would undoubtedly argue for downsizing of the US military in general. But since he's also big on "free trade" and
60 KensukeAida : It's booms on the ground, and booms in the air. In both cases, the 767 edges out the Airbus given the issue of both size and cost. With BRAC, the num
61 Trex8 : the US certainly has had a monopoly on boom tech till recently but the 767 boom is "all new" and in fact part of the reason the Japanese and Italian
62 Post contains images R2rho : Alright back to topic (A330F assembly in USA): This chart shows the KC30 as a perfect circle, equally balanced in all areas, while the others have mor
63 Scbriml : Sorry, that doesn't ring right. IF ramp space is as big a concern for the USAF as it is for the anti-KC-30 crowd, it should have been in the RFP. It
64 MSYtristar : That's what I've heard. Most will be around for another 30-40 years.
65 Post contains links Lumberton : EADS/N.G. advertise around 25000 jobs; Boeing says 44,000+ jobs will be lost. If these numbers are accurate, that would be a NET loss of around 20, 0
66 KensukeAida : It's *A* consideration. It isn't *THE* consideration. You gloss over the other fact I brought up, which is that NG's asking price is still higher tha
67 Post contains links and images Lumberton : EADS would be daft not to address this. I tried to address one possible way (and very transparent!) they will likely bid down the cost per unit. http
68 F27Friendship : people please, EUROPEAN... and didn;'t the USCG operate Agusta as wel? (which is Italian/Brittish and American) There are 3 kind of lies: lies, damne
69 Columba : Does the Kc 767 have more booms than the KC 30 ? I think the advantage of the KC 30 is that it can be in the air longer than the Kc 767. The USAF als
70 Post contains links and images Zeke : Point of fallacy, look at the costs of the passenger versions of them, they overlap depending on the options. The KC767ADV does not exist in any form
71 Lumberton : Nice to see we are rehashing the debate, charts, and posts of the countless Mil-Av threads. Point of fact: either aircraft will perform admirably for
72 Trex8 : actually it appears the main delay with the Italian birds is the wing pods not the boom, and the Japanese ones are having avionics software problems,
73 MSYtristar : Airlines are not buying the 767 becuase there are now MORE efficient models available, as is usually the case throughout the course of commericial av
74 KensukeAida : Yep. The A-109 (HH-68A). They hate it. Too many engine problems, and not enough endurance to be worth a damn outside of coastal interdictions. They m
75 Trex8 : A300 line closed last summer and they launched the A332F which has done pretty good so far, what is it - over 60 orders already?
76 Post contains links Zeke : It is not available for sale It closed Airbus Delivers Last Ever A300 To Fedex Today (by Sabenapilot Jul 12 2007 in Civil Aviation) A Tribute To The
77 KensukeAida : I see. So I guess they built the 7 or so 2007 orders. Fair enough. There are still 30 or so outstanding 767F orders (mostly for UPS). - John
78 Post contains images WINGS : Well I'm sure the 767F has more outstanding orders than the A306F, especially since Airbus delivered the last frame in June 2007, and with that Airbu
79 BHMBAGLOCK : Even if this is so, that can be enough to cause major issues. Here in BHM there are several new(~ 5 years old) maintenance hangars for KC-135. They w
80 Baroque : Arguments like that have a habit of being reversible. Where would the US aero industry be if overseas potential customers had a look at the polls of
81 Zeke : I don't think it is fair or correct to call the IAM (i.e. Boeing workers) dishonest.
82 Bobnwa : Do you really think that two Air Force pilots would be privey to the decision of the US government as to what aircraft it was going to choose? Thing
83 MSYtristar : Like I said earlier, I trust my sources.
84 Glideslope : Don't worry about it. It's the same on both sides of the pond. Europeans react to Airbus sending jobs to China in the same manner. Personally, I thin
85 Par13del : Here's another question, Airbus is all about commonality, if their product is chosen, will they make the aircraft with control sticks or the side stic
86 SKAirbus : Correction... Airbus isn't French.. It is European.. The UK, Germany, Spain and France jointly own the company... The wide body aircraft and A320 jus
87 Trex8 : the sidestick is a non issue, commercial airline pilots move between side stick planes and yoke controls all the time. the AF pilots are streamed at
88 Post contains images Teme82 : An-124 is more likely
89 KensukeAida : Presumably the side sticks. Typically USAF aircraft are treated as separate types. There's no requirement to have type rating commonality with the cu
90 Par13del : Trex8 the question is does the training cost increase when moving pilots from a non-side stick to a side stick a/c, does it cost more for a C-17 pilot
91 KensukeAida : Before you say anything else, I should probably tell you, as an American, some of the biggest French-bashers I know are European (cheifly British, bu
92 Post contains images Trex8 : if you have been at war for several hundred years with a particular nation that is a reasonable explanation for on going antagonism. if you have a po
93 Trex8 : why not just go by sea, the production rate for any A330s in the US will never be dozens/year
94 KensukeAida : Old fighter pilots remain old fighter pilots (usually in the ANG), until they retire. They don't suddenly move to heavy iron. The USAF treats heavy i
95 Post contains images KensukeAida : Our debt was paid in full many many times over. The logical explanation you are searching for is "ingratitude". And the French plant trees along thei
96 Post contains images R2rho : Ahhh, gotta love the a.net tanker threads! I do hope they delay the decision so we can keep discussing for another month or two! I'm not saying it can
97 Moo : This irks me every time it comes up - how long should almost every country in Europe, Africa and the Pacific be beholden to the US (has anyone else n
98 Post contains images Boeing4ever : You didn't read his statement right. Since when did we help France "found" itself? You might want to look a little farther back in US history. You're
99 OldAeroGuy : Do a little research on airplane type designations. The YC14 was a Boeing design. The McD design was the YC15 that later became the C17. Never heard
100 Post contains links OldAeroGuy : Whoops, I stand corrected. But I don't think this was the airplane you had in mind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-19_Alpha
101 Srbmod : Let's keep the discussion on-topic, which is the A330-200F possibly being built in Mobile, not the merits of which a/c (A330 or 767) would make the be
102 Post contains images LifelinerOne : How much ramp space is the B767-200LRF going to take up, taken that the plane will have a wing combined from the B767-300ER and -400ER? Is the differ
103 Post contains images LifelinerOne : Sorry for the rant!
104 Tdscanuck : Airplanes have to land. The maximum number of booms you can fit on the ground is the same as the number of booms you can have in the air. Why would y
105 OldAeroGuy : Unless you'd be willing to move from the Puget Sound region to Mobile, I wouldn't make this argument.
106 Lumberton : For my part, I didn't consider you post a rant--just summarizing what many of us have been trying to do for the last couple of years! Nice post IMO.
107 MD-90 : Why is that a point of fallacy when the cost of a passenger jet doesn't accurately reflect the cost of a military plane under a government contract?
108 Trex8 : do any of the present A330 MRTT customers care about the nose down stance of the plane or do only cargo airlines care enough they had to do that ugly
109 F27Friendship : The Falcons are really French yes. The Dauphin is now a product of Eurocopter, but I'll give you that when it was designed first it was French It's b
110 Post contains images SKAirbus : Of course but i guess i forgot that Airbus doesn't run itself... It is Merkel and Sarkozy... I wish Gordon Brown would stick his nose in more because
111 Trex8 : about 300 million of us wish that were true! ROTFLMAO!
112 Post contains links Srbmod : Since some of you have not heeded my previous warning, this thread is now locked. If you want to discuss the military aspects of this, do so in the f
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Finally Official: DL Move To Terminal A In PHL posted Wed Nov 7 2007 13:52:26 by RafflesKing
Airbus To Assemble A/C In USA? OK Not Really... posted Tue Dec 19 2006 16:36:58 by Tak
AA: Support Of Wright Continues To Build In The Heartland posted Fri May 19 2006 04:46:11 by MrSTL
Safest Place To Train In USA? posted Thu Oct 2 2003 11:54:55 by Sevenair
Airbus To Build In US? posted Thu Jul 25 2002 01:13:29 by F4N
Cancellations Due To Security In USA posted Mon Oct 15 2001 00:34:43 by Fly_emirates
Where To Go In USA On UsAirways Voucher... posted Fri Aug 17 2001 06:35:30 by Jzucker
Boeing To Build In Russia - Maybe posted Thu May 31 2001 07:47:07 by Aviatsiya
Ryanair To Build It's Maintenance Base In Poland posted Thu Sep 22 2005 20:58:34 by BlueSky1976
Who Would Want To Be A F/A In The USA? posted Sun Jul 29 2007 23:53:21 by Kieran74