Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EADS: Looking Out For Future US Deals  
User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6362 times:

http://www.kc45now.com/news-press-releases/2-24-2011.asp

Fore sure EADS seems to be disappointed that Boeing got the tanker deal.

But according the official statement, they see big opportunities in the future and it seems they have build-up a very good relationship with the US Military.


So what could be offered by EADS in the coming years which could be interesting for the US?

I could only see the A400M.

What are your thoughts?

[Edited 2011-02-25 12:01:57]

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinequeb From Canada, joined May 2010, 655 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6335 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
I could only see the A400M.

Don't forget Eurocopter.

http://www.eurocopterusa.com/index/index.asp


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30551 posts, RR: 84
Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6315 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So much for those commenting in the KC-X threads that EADS would never bother bidding on US defense projects again.   

User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6313 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
So much for those commenting in the KC-X threads that EADS would never bother bidding on US defense projects again.

Why should they?


The outcome of the tanker contest was very clear because of high prestige.

But transporter deals, or eurocopter deals?

Why not.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30551 posts, RR: 84
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6256 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 328JET (Reply 3):
The outcome of the tanker contest was very clear because of high prestige.

High prestige?

Flying the President of the United States around is pretty prestigious, be it in an airplane or a helicopter. And in the latter case, a European company won that contract (before they and the Bush Administration blew the specifications so far out of proportion that the costs became unacceptable).


User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6247 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
High prestige?

Yes, high prestige due to


1. the biggest order ever

2. the longest (and most watched) competition


To be honest, we had the same in germany, when the government got last minute offers for the Hornet, Strike Eag
le and Rafale instead of the Eurofighter.

We all know which aircraft was selcted...

 


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13967 posts, RR: 63
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6226 times:

The most important thing for Airbus would have been to have a factory in the US, where the staff and overhead get paid in US $$$, so that they are less dependent on the USD / EURO exchange rate. With the military order they might have gotten it past especially the French unions (factory in the US as a requirement to get the order from the US government), but now it will be a bit difficult for them.

Jan


User currently offlineredflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4314 posts, RR: 28
Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6096 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
I could only see the A400M.

I wouldn't say "only". There is a huge gap in lift capability that the A400M could fill quite nicely, and that gap IMO would be worth far more in revenue than the KC-X program.

Of course, that's assuming the A400M remains the only flying option that fills that gap.



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15715 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5904 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
I could only see the A400M

Not much need. Even less money.

Quoting queb (Reply 1):
Don't forget Eurocopter.

   Of course, they are already well in the door with the HH-65 Dolphin, but don't let that fool you. Just because the Coast Guard uses a socialist helicopter to fish Cubans out of the water, we still hate anything European.  
Quoting 328JET (Reply 3):
The outcome of the tanker contest was very clear because of high prestige.

When did tankers become prestigious? Especially more than transports?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5831 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 9):
Of course, they are already well in the door with the HH-65 Dolphin, but don't let that fool you. Just because the Coast Guard uses a socialist helicopter to fish Cubans out of the water, we still hate anything European

Do you...?

Strange, i had the feeling that quite some C27J are on order, which are italian in its origin and that you just topped up you order for the following helicopter for the army and navy:


http://www.eurocopterusa.com/news_features/2011/2-09-2011.asp


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13165 posts, RR: 78
Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5818 times:

What's a 'socialist helicopter?' If it's not a Mil or a Kamov?
Oh I see, France was part of the Warsaw Pact wasn't it, oddly just a few miles from France we did not notice that here.

A hell of a lot of Euro-copters in the US, mostly built there, from the UH-72 through all those police and EMA choppers.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16816 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5631 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Of course, they are already well in the door with the HH-65 Dolphin, but don't let that fool you. Just because the Coast Guard uses a socialist helicopter to fish Cubans out of the water, we still hate anything European

You're forgetting about the 350 UH-72s Lakotas EADS is producing for the US Army.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurocopter_UH-72_Lakota

EADS is also preparing an Armed Scout bid to to replace the US Army's OH-58s, EADS most likely has the inside track on that order too which will be another hundred or two aircraft.

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,216265,00.html



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5630 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
When did tankers become prestigious? Especially more than transports?

   My thoughts exactly. People are carrying on like this (the tanker deal) is the first deal EADS ever bid on for the US armed forces.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlinequeb From Canada, joined May 2010, 655 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 5584 times:

...ant the USCG HC-144A, based on the EADS CASA CN-235

http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/mrs/projectdescription.asp


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 5562 times:

  Would EADS revive the MAKO just in case?   

http://www.airforce-technology.com/p...ojects/mako/images/eads_mako_3.jpg



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9489 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 5529 times:

Well to start, EADS defense is a relatively small company when it comes to defense compared to the much larger US companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, United Technologies, etc.

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):


So what could be offered by EADS in the coming years which could be interesting for the US?

I could only see the A400M.

What are your thoughts?

Astrium: US has a strong relationship with Rocketdyne, Boeing, Northrup, UTC etc for satellites and I don't see it going to the less experienced Astrium. I think Astrium is going more in the direction of commercial and private projects rather than government projects. Also in that area, the export control requirements are extremely strict so a lot of the projects only allow US citizens to work on the projects and no technical information can leave US borders. That is not a case of corporate protectionism as it is a case of national security, so foreign companies are at a disadvantage.

Eurocopter: Already a supplier to the military including army and marines. I see potential there.

Cassidian: I think there is potential with their security systems, but there is a lot of competition from more experienced companies, so it will be an uphill battle. It all depends on the quality and price of what they can deliver. They are a pioneer in UAV technology which is a growing segment and I think has a lot of potential. Again missile technology is a tough sector for non-US companies because of the export control requirements.

Airbus: I don’t really see the need for the A400M as it is an airplane between the C130 and C-17 as far as size goes. The Air Force loves the C-17 even though it is a huge gas hog, although the production line is winding down.

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):

But according the official statement, they see big opportunities in the future and it seems they have build-up a very good relationship with the US Military.

There are definitely big opportunities out there, but the article doesn't say they see big opportunities (I think that is your opinion since the article accurately states that the tanker was one of many opportunities) in the near future which I think is the case. There are no big opportunities in the future right now since the military is in a contraction state. Lockheed, Boeing and Northrup Grumman are all taking hits to their bottom lines and laying people off because of defense spending cuts. EADS would be pretty naïve if they thought that now is a time for big opportunities.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15715 posts, RR: 26
Reply 16, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5385 times:

Quoting 328JET (Reply 9):
Quoting GDB (Reply 10):

Does sarcasm not work on the internet?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5372 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 16):
Does sarcasm not work on the internet?

Sometimes sarcasm is not visible...  


User currently offlinesebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4767 times:

Quoting 328JET (Reply 17):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 16):
Does sarcasm not work on the internet?

Sometimes sarcasm is not visible...

Ah come on, the joke was obvious ...



Congrats to Boeing, but did somebody ever doubt it would end like this ?


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15715 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4693 times:

Quoting sebolino (Reply 18):
Congrats to Boeing, but did somebody ever doubt it would end like this ?

Only everybody.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinesebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3681 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4517 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
Quoting sebolino (Reply 18):
Congrats to Boeing, but did somebody ever doubt it would end like this ?

Only everybody.

Uh ?

The most used sentence beginning about this contract on this site is "It will freeze in hell before ...", so I will say far from everybody.
Even if one never know what can happen, the "risk" of this contract going to a European company was very low. The subject became much too political for that.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15715 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4351 times:

Quoting sebolino (Reply 20):
Even if one never know what can happen, the "risk" of this contract going to a European company was very low. The subject became much too political for that.

I can tell you that quite a few people who followed this very closely and had a lot of interest in the contest did not see it that way. Many people fully expected Airbus to win the deal right up until Boeing was announced as the winner.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7053 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4240 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):
With the military order they might have gotten it past especially the French unions (factory in the US as a requirement to get the order from the US government), but now it will be a bit difficult for them.

Boeing found a way to out-source a significant percentage of its 787 out-side of the US, if getting a facility on US soil is so important to EADS they could do that at any time, certainely there are enough Airbus a/c in the US to open maintenance facilities, or even an assembly line.
Personally - my opinion - I believe that what they want is for the US to pay for the facility with the same "State Infrastructure Tax Breaks, Benefits etc. that they protested at the WTO, which is the primary difference between a potential US plant and the plant in China.

In China EADS is involved in financing the line, since the US has bought itself into their current massive trade deficit, what is another few billion to create an EADS line, it is either greed or the leverage of US production facilities is simply fluff and not as important as they claim.


User currently offlinewvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4127 times:

With everyone in the US mad about the out sourcing of work and the un-employment it would be political suicide to order anything made out of the country the US has and can develop its own aircraft so if I was at EADS I wouldn't hold my breath for any contracts in the near future anyway. As far as the A400M very doubfull the US doesnt really need it.

User currently offlineolle From Sweden, joined Feb 2007, 272 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3566 times:

US needs to be carefully about "made in US" policy. It can easily hit back while US is one of the largest exporters of military equipment. Made in Japan, Made in EU how will that effect US exporters?

User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5890 posts, RR: 6
Reply 25, posted (3 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3542 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think ITAR restrictions could play a significant role as to who gets what. The tanker is fairly innocuous when it comes to protecting military intelligence. But I don't think you'll see EADS getting too many major US projects for a long-range bomber or surveillance aircraft.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic EADS: Looking Out For Future US Deals
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Store Production Facilities For Future Use posted Tue Oct 6 2009 07:54:26 by Rheinwaldner
U.S. Army Favors Vtol For Future Combat posted Tue Oct 7 2008 13:33:06 by RedFlyer
When Is The Hearing For The Usaf Tanker Deal posted Wed May 28 2008 15:59:18 by Dougbr2006
Future Usaf Jet Trainer posted Mon Nov 26 2007 11:30:12 by N74JW
Is The KC-30 To Slow For The Usaf? posted Thu Oct 11 2007 06:31:59 by KC135TopBoom
F/A-18Es For The Usaf? posted Fri Mar 24 2006 05:43:51 by CX747
Eads Rolls Out Tanker Demonstrator posted Wed Jan 11 2006 16:22:28 by WINGS
Why Not A Dedicated Tanker Design For The Usaf? posted Tue Jan 3 2006 04:20:46 by Dandy_don
747's For The Usaf? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 02:29:19 by AirRyan
C-5: People Looking Out Of The Roof Hatch, Why? posted Sun Jul 4 2004 01:21:00 by Sabena332

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format