Tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4629 posts, RR: 7 Posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4317 times:
Found this on BusinessWeek but it was done by Spiegel http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,640426,00.html
It discusses that the German military (and Germany itself?) is disatisfied with the EADS monopoly and how the politician cave each time. Below is a quote on the Eurofighter but the article also touches on the NH-90 and the A400M.
Quote: The plan was to order at least 200 "Jäger 90" jets, and they were to be ready for use from 1997. One fighter was to cost around 83 million German marks including spare parts.
....
By 1992 the price had jumped to 134 million marks. Defense Minister Volker Rühe demanded a "reversal" but all he got was a change in the name to "Eurofighter." Technical problems piled up. The computer software didn't work properly, or there were problems with the tail fin or the wings.
The German air force didn't get the first jets until July 2006. It now has 38 Eurofighters. But 14 of them have been sent back for repairs. Some of them still suffer instrument failure during flights. Of the six single-seat aircraft at the Neuburg air base only four are fit for service on average. That's just enough to provide day and night cover for Germany's airspace.
As someone in the USA I don't have direct exposure to the discussion and I know that here on A.net national passions tend to get enflamed. So to those "exposed" to the issues involved, how bad is it?
Tugg
[Edited 2009-08-06 13:29:50]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
Wvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4280 times:
Not sure how bad it is but I am glad the US taxpayers aren't the only ones getting hosed by their big defense contractors..lol
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1367 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4250 times:
Quoting Wvsuperhornet (Reply 1): Not sure how bad it is but I am glad the US taxpayers aren't the only ones getting hosed by their big defense contractors..lol
Yeah if anything what I find interesting is how our "private" aerospace companies seem to have many of the same problems of their supposedly worse public ones. This reminds me of the subsidies debate -- both US and European contractors get sweetheart deals that amount to subsidies even if ours are not technically publicly funded.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4237 times:
Yeah, but at least the US is willing to cancel projects that get out of control, then collect penalties. In Europe, all EADS has to say is the word "layoffs" and the EU politicians get out the check books.
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1367 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4230 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 3): Yeah, but at least the US is willing to cancel projects that get out of control, then collect penalties. In Europe, all EADS has to say is the word "layoffs" and the EU politicians get out the check books.
That is true. Now this will probably turn into a flamefest once others read my post lol
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, RR: 5 Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4164 times:
If you look at all the recent aircraft acquisitions of the German Army, Air Force, Federal Police etc...you will see that they always went for an EADS product.
The only one that did not went to EADS was the acquisition of second P3 Orions, Airbus did offer an A320MPA though but our MPAs were in really bad shape and a solution was needed rather yesterday than today, luckily for us the Netherlands wanted to get rid of their Orions........but as we have learned now, they wanted that for a reason as the Orions are mostly in repair than in the air
I do support the idea of buying mostly European but think that a monopoly should be avoided therefore I also support the acquisition of CH 53Ks to replace our older CH53Gs and the lease/buy C17s in addition to the A400M, EADS should not get every single order from the German goverment
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10442 posts, RR: 20 Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4087 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 3): Yeah, but at least the US is willing to cancel projects that get out of control, then collect penalties.
Cancel, yes, collect penalties, not so much.
Most cancellations are "at the convenience of the government" and involve USG paying penalties rather than canceling.
It looks like USG won the last round in court over the A-12, but GD+Boeing are vowing to appeal. $2.8B is at risk.
TheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3347 posts, RR: 30 Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4081 times:
You should always take Spiegel articles with a grain of salt. They have, for example, always been very critical on EADS.
However, it is true. Today, almost the whole german Defence industry is owned by EADS. This is, indeed, a problem, as there is no competition. Thus, delays, bad quality, and high prices.
I think we can only solve this issue by partly abandoning the strict "buy European" policy, as there is no real room for serious competition besides EADS with sufficient german shares.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3880 times:
Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 7): You should always take Spiegel articles with a grain of salt. They have, for example, always been very critical on EADS.
However, it is true. Today, almost the whole german Defence industry is owned by EADS. This is, indeed, a problem, as there is no competition. Thus, delays, bad quality, and high prices.
I think we can only solve this issue by partly abandoning the strict "buy European" policy, as there is no real room for serious competition besides EADS with sufficient german shares.
Well said, my friend. But this is not just a German problem. EADS has a strangle hold on most of the EU. I'm not being critical on that, just stating a fact. In the US, we have some of the same problem, but it is spread out among many contractors, not just one. We have NG, GD, LM, and Boeing as the major players in defense contracts. Together, they do about 95% of the defense weapons contracts.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3858 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): We have NG, GD, LM, and Boeing as the major players in defense contracts. Together, they do about 95% of the defense weapons contracts.
In fact you only have LM and Boeing, the other manufacturers have stopped building large airplanes of fighter jets long ago.
In some areas Boeing has a monopoly:
If it comes to a new tanker aircraft Boeing is the only option, because LM would have started from scratch building a new aircraft as they don´t offer a suitable plattform same for the P-8.
LM should start building larger aircraft again, a Hercules successor would be a good start.
F22 production will run out, the C5M is putting new technology in an old shell and in few years the only aircraft left in production will be the F35 and a few C130Js. No good outlook for the future if you ask me.
10 years ago, LM should have started building something like the E190. They would have a foot back in the civil market and a plattform for a special military aircraft that Boeing has no with the 737. Maybe they should have bought Fairchild Dornier and the 728Jet
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26676 posts, RR: 83 Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3835 times:
Well building a new plane from scratch is very expensive, which is why the KC-767 and A330 MRTT exist. They can do the role about as effectively as a new-design and are both far cheaper and quicker to bring to market.
LM is unlikely to risk the capital to build a new platform on it's own dime - especially a commercial one - since their is no guarantee it would become successful. The days of Boeing and the Dash 80 are long gone...
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3828 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 10): LM is unlikely to risk the capital to build a new platform on it's own dime - especially a commercial one - since their is no guarantee it would become successful. The days of Boeing and the Dash 80 are long gone
Well then, they are loosing a big market share and Boeing will have a monopoly on large aircraft for the USAF and Navy.....
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26676 posts, RR: 83 Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3782 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 11): Well then, they are loosing a big market share and Boeing will have a monopoly on large aircraft for the USAF and Navy...
They'll likely join forces with either Boeing or Airbus as necessary to tender an RFP, as NG did with Airbus on the KC-30A.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3734 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 12): They'll likely join forces with either Boeing or Airbus as necessary to tender an RFP, as NG did with Airbus on the KC-30A.
That was no real help for NG......it still is an Airbus in most people eyes.
I see high chances with a Hercules successor maybe LM can do something here and use this aircraft as a platform for other developments or special mission aircraft.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26676 posts, RR: 83 Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3643 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 13): That was no real help for NG......it still is an Airbus in most people eyes.
It still won them the RFP thanks to offering more performance than the KC-767 Advanced (even if the USAF was ruled to have incorrectly graded that extra performance).
Quoting Columba (Reply 13): I see high chances with a Hercules successor maybe LM can do something here and use this aircraft as a platform for other developments or special mission aircraft.
I believe LM is working on a new Hercules, possibly with a new fuselage to offer more internal space.
Or maybe they can license the A400M from Airbus and build it under contract for the USAF in Georgia.
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9135 posts, RR: 96 Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3608 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): But this is not just a German problem. EADS has a strangle hold on most of the EU
Except perhaps the UK, which has its own monopolist....
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): We have NG, GD, LM, and Boeing as the major players in defense contracts. Together, they do about 95% of the defense weapons contracts.
Hey? What about us?
Quoting Columba (Reply 9): In fact you only have LM and Boeing, the other manufacturers have stopped building large airplanes of fighter jets long ago.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6255 posts, RR: 39 Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3588 times:
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 787 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3574 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 14): I believe LM is working on a new Hercules, possibly with a new fuselage to offer more internal space.
Yeah, but that is more of a reaction to the A400. IIRC is was called the 'C-130XL', but I don't think it went forward, just an idea.
IMO Germany should get a few C-17s regardless of how the A400M turns out. It would provide more capacity and range for larger items and loads.
It is not just EADS, but the defense industry as a whole, with the 'under bid, over promise' mentality. Just say anything to get the bid, then ask for more money when the project is a couple billion into development. The Government doesn't want to lose its billions and have no hardware to show for it... so more money.
If LM wanted into the airliner market, IMO it wouldn't take much. A C-130 replacement program could also spawn a NG 737 replacement using the same tech, cutting down development costs. After they sell a zillion of those, they move up to a 787 size aircraft.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6255 posts, RR: 39 Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3504 times:
Me neither, actually. I cannot imagine anything worse than being underwater in a steel tube. I have read extensively about WWII, and especially about the submarine services. What those men went through is beyond belief; and on top of that, they had by far the highest casualty rates of any service in the war (on both sides, but especially the Germans.) Actually, I have the highest regard for submariners
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9135 posts, RR: 96 Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3493 times:
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 19): Actually, I have the highest regard for submariners
I have huge admiration for them.
They're all by definition complete head cases though. You have to be to volunteer for that particular existence.
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 19): What those men went through is beyond belief; and on top of that, they had by far the highest casualty rates of any service in the war (on both sides, but especially the Germans.)
Totally agree. Being a German submariner in the closing stages of the war can't have been particularly funny. They too, have my admiration.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3457 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 9): Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
We have NG, GD, LM, and Boeing as the major players in defense contracts. Together, they do about 95% of the defense weapons contracts.
In fact you only have LM and Boeing, the other manufacturers have stopped building large airplanes of fighter jets long ago.
In some areas Boeing has a monopoly:
For military aircraft it is Boeing and LM, but NG and GD build almost all USN warships and SSNs. Those contracts are usually worth as much as airplane contracts.
Tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4629 posts, RR: 7 Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3320 times:
Unless you count the unmanned systems and currently it's NG and GA that are the leaders there. It will be interesting to see how Boeing's, LM's, BAE's, etc. entrants in the field will do. It could redefine the field.
Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3199 times:
Quoting Tugger (Reply 22): Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 21):
For military aircraft it is Boeing and LM,
Unless you count the unmanned systems and currently it's NG and GA that are the leaders there. It will be interesting to see how Boeing's, LM's, BAE's, etc. entrants in the field will do. It could redefine the field.
That is true, then that could make NG the biggest defense contractor, since they are also building the USS Gerald Ford, the new CVN class, USS San Antonio class of LPDs, and 29 of the USS Arleigh Burke class DDGs.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10442 posts, RR: 20 Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23): That is true, then that could make NG the biggest defense contractor, since they are also building the USS Gerald Ford, the new CVN class, USS San Antonio class of LPDs, and 29 of the USS Arleigh Burke class DDGs.
Not to mention half the Virginia class attack submarines....
Inspiration, move me brightly!
25 Wvsuperhornet: You all know we can vent and arugue this point for years, but as much as it frustrates me and my fellow americans and our brothers and sisters across
26 Trex8: they may be able to make it but they may not be around in a decade to fix it!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4629 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9135 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 787 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
