Northrop Beats Boeing for Tanker Program, Person Says (Update1)
By Tony Capaccio and Edmond Lococo
Feb. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Northrop Grumman Corp., the third- largest U.S. defense contractor, won a U.S. Air Force program valued at as much as $35 billion to build 179 aerial refueling tankers, breaking Boeing Co.'s half-century hold on the business, according to a person familiar with the decision.
Northrop and partner European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. won an initial contract of $1.5 billion for development and purchase of four test aircraft and options of $10.5 billion to build 64 aircraft, the person said. Boeing was the unanimous pick to win in a Bloomberg News analyst survey this month. The Air Force will announce the contract winner at a press conference at 5 p.m. New York time today.
Greaser From Bahamas, joined Jan 2004, 1024 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12433 times:
Boeing will file a complaint. I have no doubt. Given the latest updates regarding the qualifications after the "game had commenced". There will be no real decision for another 12 months while the GAO goes over everything.
Ikramerica From United States, joined May 2005, 18424 posts, RR: 60 Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12177 times:
Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1): I would expect Boeing to appeal and this deal won't be finalized for quite a while.
Especially because they already won it once, only to have that deal scuttled.
I love how some people are saying "Northrup Grumman" won the deal. That's to confuse the American public. Yeah, NG is converting their commercial A330 to a tanker.
Airbus won it, and will snap together parts built in the EU from factories subsidized by the EU.
This battle is only starting. To steal an Oscar movie title: "There Will Be Blood."
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Andrej From United Kingdom (England), joined Jun 2001, 710 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12160 times:
there is an press conference in Pentagon so now its official. It is expected that Boeing will appeal, but we have to wait and see. New Name: KC-45A
More from Reuters:
By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON, Feb 29 (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force has
picked a Northrop Grumman-led transatlantic team over rival
Boeing Co to start building a new aerial refueling fleet
in a major upset, a prominent defense analyst said on Friday.
The plane offered by Northrop Grumman Corp <NOC.N> and its
European partner, Airbus parent EADS , outperformed
Chicago-based Boeing's aircraft in four of five areas, and
matched it in the fifth, said Loren Thompson of the Lexington
Institute. He cited officials involved in the contract award.
The winner-take-all deal is to supply 179 tanker aircraft,
valued at $30 billion to $40 billion over the next 15 years.
The aircraft will phase out Eisenhower-era KC-135 tankers built
by Boeing.
Northrop shares initially shot up more than $5 in
after-hours trading on the New York Stock Exchange to $83.75
per share while Boeing slumped by nearly $3 to $80 per share.
The program marks the first stage of a multi-decade plan
to replace more than 500 KC-135 tankers used to extend the
range of fighter jets and other warplanes.
With follow-on orders and in-service maintenance, it could
be the second costliest military purchase over decades, topped
only by Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter.
Future phases of the purchase could bring the cost of the
entire fleet to more than $100 billion, although the winner of
this competition is not assured of winning future ones, Air
Force officials have said.
Boeing's KC-767 had been widely predicted to win the
initial contract, partly because it had a greater amount of
U.S. domestic production compared with the Northrop-EADS
candidate, based on the Airbus A330 commercial airliner.
The winner of the competition was to be officially
announced by Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne at 5 p.m. (2200
GMT).
The Air Force calls the new tanker fleet its top
acquisition priority.
In 2004, the U.S. Congress killed an earlier $23.5 billion
Air Force plan to lease and then buy 100 modified Boeing 767
tankers amid a Pentagon procurement scandal brought to light
chiefly by Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the all-but certain
Republican nominee for U.S. president.
(
F9Animal From United States, joined Dec 2004, 3390 posts, RR: 36 Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12083 times:
Wow, the USA has gone French. Nothing better than a non US built aircraft protecting our country. Sorry guys, but this is a major blow to the United States. As a tax payer, I am sickened by my government. I want my tax dollars to go to a US built aircraft. Is the government trying to destroy our economy?
Andhen From Norway, joined Dec 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12086 times:
While the court struggle moves on, Airbus/NG will start their infrastructur, and start assembley.. When the court approves the decision, the tankers will be ready to flow out of the factory..
I dont think there will be much blood.. The USAF is tired of Boeing.. Boeing does not have much credit after the leasing scandal.
Airbus/NG will deliver, just like eurocopter has done with the uh-72.. (which the airforce has appreciated very much)!
Scbriml From United Kingdom (England), joined Jul 2003, 8907 posts, RR: 50 Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12083 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Since this is clearly not a political, or the easy decision, one can only assume the better tanker won.
Starrion From United States, joined Jul 2003, 911 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12033 times:
If the Air Force was hoping for public support for their "big budget" solution to replace their tankers, air superiority fighters, and heavy lift cargo planes, then outsourcing the bulk of the work wasn't their best choice. I would imagine that the unions are calling their congressional representitives right now. I think the Air Force will end up with KC-135R's after all.
Ikramerica From United States, joined May 2005, 18424 posts, RR: 60 Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12039 times:
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 11): Since this is clearly not a political, or the easy decision, one can only assume the better tanker won.
If only it were that simple...
Seriously, our military has a LONG history of buying the WRONG product, products that don't work, that crash, that explode. So assuming it must be the better choice is a big assumption.
What will be interesting is that I was under the impression that the Boeing deal cost Billions less, so there will need to be some hearings by busy body politicians to ask why the USAF decided on the more expensive option...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Gh123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11934 times:
Congratulations to NG & EADS. Just comes to show that the USAF expects and will only accept the best and most suitable products for a certain role - as of course they should.
I wish the US all the best of luck with their new birds and all who fly in and 'off' them!
Andrej From United Kingdom (England), joined Jun 2001, 710 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11934 times:
Well I thought that Northrop Grumman and EADS were partners. So yes EADS won as well.
Quoting F9Animal (Reply 8): I want my tax dollars to go to a US built aircraft.
and as US taxpayer I want my tax dollars to go to better plane that will fit US Air Force needs and requirements! I can careless who makes the airplane, as it will have an impact in the US. They will open new plant, right? Obviously I expect that certain work will remain in the European factories.
Well I hope that US constituents and Air Force appointees did right job and choose the best aircraft. I remember the Boeing 'deal' when taxpayers would have to pay a lot more, when Boeing won the lease deal. To be honest that was not fair deal as well.
Astuteman From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2005, 6193 posts, RR: 85 Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11933 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 13): Seriously, our military has a LONG history of buying the WRONG product, products that don't work, that crash, that explode. So assuming it must be the better choice is a big assumption.
Presumably such issues should be a pretty low risk for an A330 derivative.
So much for the changing of criteria at NG/EADS expense.
Do we know what justification was given for the choice?
Breiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1381 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11939 times:
Quoting Andrej (Thread starter): Northrop Grumman Corp., the third- largest U.S. defense contractor, won a U.S. Air Force program valued at as much as $35 billion to build 179 aerial refueling tankers
Very many said the KC-30 is a better plane.
The USA are a country of free enterprise and competition.
As an Airbus fan, I am of course delighted by the choice, but I have to say "hats off" for the USAF which decided what they wanted technically disregarding political implications. It takes some guts and spirit.
Scbriml From United Kingdom (England), joined Jul 2003, 8907 posts, RR: 50 Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11929 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 13): What will be interesting is that I was under the impression that the Boeing deal cost Billions less, so there will need to be some hearings by busy body politicians to ask why the USAF decided on the more expensive option...
I haven't seen the cost of the two bids.
AFAIK, the AF said cost wasn't the #1 consideration.
MCIGuy From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11932 times:
Quoting Greaser (Reply 2): Boeing will file a complaint. I have no doubt. Given the latest updates regarding the qualifications after the "game had commenced". There will be no real decision for another 12 months while the GAO goes over everything
Yeah, we've gotten by on the KC-135 for this long, what's a couple of more years? I know I'll be on the phone and email monday and I highly recommend Boeing vigorously protest this. Sorry, I just don't want to see such an important component outsourced to a foreign supplier. I think it's a strategic blunder overall.
NG is nothing more than a subcontractor on this Airbus tanker.
Andhen From Norway, joined Dec 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11824 times:
Yezzz...!!!
The best airplane won!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am not very surprised..
This is a major blow to Boeing. The USAF has really pointed out to them that they can not keep warming over 30 year old material.. I hope they have learnt a message from this!!!!!
Congrats to Airbus/NG!!!!
I am very happy now. Zeke, thank you for your good and correct posts!!!
Scbriml From United Kingdom (England), joined Jul 2003, 8907 posts, RR: 50 Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11775 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Stitch (Reply 9): The USAF just formally announced the KC-30A has won the KC-45 RFP.
Amazing!
Return ticket from London to Mobile, Alabama - $945
Cost of a 179 KC-30 tankers - $40billion
The look on the faces of those who said the KC-30 would never win - PRICELESS
Legoguy From Ireland, joined Jun 2006, 3160 posts, RR: 51 Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11775 times:
Amazing. I thought Boeing had this in the bag. I thought the 767 would have been a good replacement for the KC-130's size wise. Congrats to Northrup and Airbus.
I guess this is a slap in the face to several people here. Queue the predicted threads from those arguing against the order
Now the obvious question. Unless Boeing appeals and wins, will these air frames be counted within Airbus's A330 tally? If so, surely that brings their A330 order total to above 1000
[Edited 2008-02-29 14:28:12]
Can you say 'Beer Can' without sounding like a Jamaican saying 'Bacon'?
Glideslope From United States, joined May 2004, 1319 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11707 times:
Wow, the better plane actually won. Can't believe it.
[Edited 2008-02-29 14:27:19]
"He wins his battles by making no mistakes." Sun Tzu
26 AA7295: Are you kidding!!! In a time of a massive trade deficit, and the economy slumping. Seriously, everyone in the US government needs to be fired!
27 Scbriml: Would you be saying that if they'd selected the KC-767? [edit - spelling][Edited 2008-02-29 14:29:06]
28 Blackbird1331: I thought the Air Force just got to express their opinion, not make the final decision. I thought congress made the decision as to how and where to sp
29 Himself: ...except that they won the P-8A contract with an even older airframe. I was hoping Boeing would win, but I can see that this helps the USAF a lot, w
30 AA7295: France doesn't have the worlds largest airforce.
31 MCIGuy: Keep in mind, this is an election year in the US and at least one of the candidates is "slash and burn" when it comes to mitlitary spending. This coul
32 NA: It really a bold move for the USAF to order the more modern aircraft over the dated, more patriotic solution. I´ve always questioned why Generals who
33 Moo: Out of all of these threads over the past few months, this sentiment has always made me smile - the 767 offering was the only offering Boeing could h
34 Andrej: Hey all, from Reuters: CEO of EADS Louis Gallois stated that EADS/NG did not offer basement price to win the tanker award. What exactly is the "baseme
35 Rheinbote: Cool down, most of the profit will stay with Northrop Grumman. Guess why there's a rule that no-US contenders have to partner with a home player. And
36 Glideslope: IMO, this was a factor. We can thank Mr. Putin. Never the less, it was the better choice. Boeing, get your head out of your missles and back into com
37 Thorny: With 787s and A350s all over the world, so will be A330.
38 Strudders: Just sitting here looking at the reaction is very interesting. For those who say "outsourcing is a disaster" "must be a US Plane" etc can not see the
39 Starrion: I can't imagine what the Air Force is thinking. This should be entertaining given how both the Democrats have been in Ohio badmouthing outsourcing and
40 Bingo: I really hope the jobs lost to outsourcing and American by Americans rhetoric stays to a minimum. I’m a big die hard Boeing fan. Despite this I have
41 Andrej: So Boeing can blame Putin for their loss? I am sorry but Putin can not be blamed for everything or can we blame him for the global warming as well? A
43 Highlander0: Well done to the NG and EADS team. But lets not count the preverbial chickens until they're hatched and the contract is signed.
44 MCIGuy: Biggest doesn't necessarily mean baddest.
45 N328KF: McCain wasn't against Boeing, he was against the way the structure of the deal and the way it was awarded.
46 NA: Still 10 years younger than "Grandpa" 767. And until the 787 flies the A330 is state-of-the-art of mid-sized airliners.
47 Astuteman: I think that the point that some understandably patriotic US posters are missing is that the 767 itself probably also has critical components in it t
48 NorCal: At $40 billion for 179 tankers, that works out to about $223 million per frame. If the KC-30 costs $160 million per frame, that works out to a potenti
49 MCIGuy: Yeah, but I worry about the fate of several programs including F-22 if this or that candidate gets elected, not just the new tanker deal. I agree, in
50 Astuteman: A) The figure quoted has been $30Bn - $40Bn B) That figure will include all sorts of through-life costs that go way beyond the acquisition. Regards
51 Jackonicko: A GREAT day for the USAF (and for EADS). I can scarcely believe it. A triumph for the better tanker, rather than the more politically acceptable solut
52 Scipio: With Boeing's history on this deal, and if it is true that the KC-30 won on 4 of the 5 criteria and matched the KC-767 on the 5th, it is going to be d
53 AA7295: Boeing now regrets the whole global production process, hint hint, the delays. I must admit, Boeing has become very complacent as of late with their
54 MCIGuy: On a side note, I'm seeing this as the final nail in the coffin for the KC-10 also, eventually.
55 AirFrnt: Thankfully, the best part of this is that it assures that Airbus will never get launch aid again. That alone is worth the difference in a very tight b
56 Starrion: Right. Not going to happen. The USAF just waved a ton of fresh meat in front of all the politicians who are seeking office. They are going to be figh
57 StealthZ: Hardly worth even considering, with a $800B trade deficit in 2006, a $12B(or even $35B) spread over several years(or decades even) is not even a roun
58 Glideslope: Degree. It will have an impact. Perhaps it was even part of the decision? Watching a James Bond movie.
61 AutoThrust: Sour grapes? Fantastic comment, may the best win in fairness! I'm sure Boeing will win next competition with a great plane like the 787.Welcome on my
62 7cubed: How old are those tankers? Do you really think there's any chance of France replacing them with a non-EADS product? I don't think so either.
63 Av8boy: Not to mention NRE, which will make up a substantial portion of that initial number but won't impact subsequent airframe purchases. Dave
65 NorCal: Well at $30 billion that is a potential profit of $1.2 billion if the KC-30 costs $160 million. After taxes, fighting the likely appeal, all the adve
66 Scipio: http://www.northropgrumman.com/kc30/ Nothrop is advertizing this as "the best solution for the USAF and for US taxpayers", adding that the A330 has wo
67 7cubed: So why pump billions into Airbus? Why not just buy the aircraft that was currently on the market? I understand what you're saying but find it counter
68 Andrej: I think that Bloomberg numbers are little better. As Dk1967 pointed out, Airbus will build 64 planes at $10.6 billion, so that would be around $165.6
69 Venus6971: Does this make the C-17 instead of the A400 a more desirable purchase?
70 BoeingFever777: I like how all the cheerleaders think Airbus won this contract! Without Northrup-Grumman and their very long outstanding relationship with the USAF...
71 Bingo: Thats why it's being built here. This will ultimately help our economy. But my Toby Keith Blinders wont let me see that
72 Scipio: If you think about it, Boeing's attitude has been a little bit: "We have a model here that we can't sell in the commercial market anymore. Let's sell
73 ZRH: I read on German TV (ARD) text that it is $ 35 bi.
74 DBCC: Very true. Maybe Boeing should try and spend their employee's time on getting the 787 out the door. So, next step is to sell the USA the Eurofighter.
75 RedFlyer: I have to agree with you on this one, my friend. It's the best plane based on the criteria laid out by the Air Force. But keep in mind, we still don'
76 Highlander0: Good to see you over here Jackonicko. Perhaps EADS and Thales/NG/IAI?BAe could come up with a AWACS successor/competitor and really piss people off?
77 DBCC: Boeing is no longer a manufacturer. They are an assembler, just like Airbus. Enough of the 767 is European or Far-East/Japan produced and then shippe
78 BoeingFever777: Wow really? Thanks for the lecture...
79 Strudders: No thats fine except that they are pumping millions into the USAF's choice of Tanker. However are you going to publicly say that the 767 was better t
80 Andrej: The total value of the package is valued between $30-40 billion (Bloomberg states $35 billion), however first option of 64 planes costs $10.6 billion
81 Bingo: Usually in government contracts, the companies are awarded a king's ransom to build the first couple of examples. This is because the government know
82 Atmx2000: Now, now, you should know better to claim a decision isn't political when there are parties who benefit from each possible decision. France buys very
83 ACW367: N-G is American with a European sub-contractor. Boeing is American with a Japanese subcontractor. Both final assembly lines are AMERICAN. Next you wi
84 7cubed: Unfortunately, your thoughts on toyota'a and vw's are outdated. The EU has spent billions building industries so they don't have to depend on America
85 Flighty: Good. The Boeing KC-767 began as a disaster for Boeing and a humiliation for the US Air Force. If you humiliate the Air Force, there are consequences.
86 JakeOrion: I'm just going to say it outright: This is a hit to national pride. It means we (Americans) lost out to a foreign product (A330) instead of an "Americ
87 Bingo: Very True...Thats like saying Dell or Apple make computers. The mere fact that the planes are still assembled here still amazes me. Look at Cessna, e
88 Scbriml: I like how the sore losers are calling it an Airbus/French victory.
89 Bingo: Yep, you hit the nail on the head with that one. Its one thing to be proud of such an winning such an accomplishment but its takes a bigger man to sh
90 TropicBird: Based on what we know now (which is still somewhat limited) would Boeing have been better off to have stayed with the KC-777?
91 GoAllegheny: According to the www.washingtonpost.com: Northrop plans to build a plant in Mobile, Ala., to assemble its planes, which will create 5,000 new jobs th
92 Halls120: Congrats to NG. Hopefully Boeing won't appeal, but I have my doubts.
93 BoeingFever777: Its a victory and major win for EADS and getting some gains on defense contracts!
94 Charles79: Regardless of the country of origin for most of the parts/assembly point/the name of the cat of the owner of the warehouse, etc, I am happy to see the
96 Venus6971: As a former KC-135A ,EC-135H,C-137B/C,E-3 and RC-135W/V Crew Chief my congrats to NG/EADS but you know history always repeats itself. The KC-135A was
97 Scipio: According to the Boeing and Northrop websites: Fuel offload capacities. Boom: KC-767: 900 gallons per minute KC-30: 8,000 lbs per minute = 1,333 gallo
98 JakeOrion: They should NOT appeal. They have no reason to. The A330 is a more capable airframe over the 767. However, if Boeing would have offered a KC-787 and
99 ArniePie: The one true big lesson all of us can learn from it: ALWAYS TRUST THE MALAYSIAN SUN
100 KevinSmith: NBC Nightly new reported on it tonight calling it a major blow to Boeing. They however were little off when they said Boeing lost the contract to conv
101 BHMBAGLOCK: How about the USAF and Alabama? I don't see it that way at all. The US military contracting companies have been put on notice via this contract, the
102 RomeoKC10FE: Terrible day for the the country, taxpayers and USAF, I'm disappointed in our leaders!
103 TaromA380: How do you know ? Look how people thought about USA/Boeing till yesterday. However, as an european tax-eater, I must say thank you USAF. The funniest
104 ACW367: Not sure who will end up building them, but I think that you will find that the American company CAE do a very nice line in A330 Tanker simulators ht
105 Runga08: Official name is the KC45A. According to the corporate communication. http://www.irconnect.com/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=137410
106 Cageyjames: I have to say I'm impressed with my government. It would have been very easy to just pick the KC-767 and have a decent tanker. But they looked over th
107 LAXintl: Bravo! I'm glad the the government stuck with getting the best technology and airplane to meet its requirements, and did not blindly go down the path
108 Scipio: Boeing Statement on U.S. Air Force Aerial Refueling Tanker Decision ST. LOUIS, Feb. 29, 2008 -- We were just informed that our KC-767 Advanced Tanker
109 Bingo: I agree they shouldnt for the same reason, but the mere fact that they can is what makes this process American.... How can say you'd appeal if the 78
110 Charles79: Would you care elaborate on your statement? Our leaders chose a highly capable aircraft to replace an ageing fleet in dire need of replacement, ensur
111 BoeingFever777: LOL... Please that was said with pure sarcasm.
112 Jackonicko: Thanks for the welcome, Highlander. Boeing are far from down and out as a result of this decision. Philadelphia can't build Chinooks and Ospreys fast
113 ACW367: The initial contract is still smaller than the McD/BAe AV-8A buy in terms of aircraft numbers. Obviously the final aspiration is for larger number of
114 Iloveboeing: I think that Boeing would have been better off to offer a KC-777. The 777 is newer, bigger, has more range, has more powerful engines, and is much mo
115 Scbriml: You have to consider that the AF knew how big of a decision this was. They could have taken the easy route and picked Boeing (which even the biggest
116 AADC10: You should be sickened by the way the Air Force and Boeing rigged contract. That was one of the worst military contracting scandals of recent years.
117 KennyK: I'm glad they're not going to hang a pair of RR engines on the KC-45A as the British content would be around 45% and where would your anti-French sent
118 Bingo: You should be! The system worked! After 232 years the system still works. Like any election, you may not like who won but the mere fact that the elec
119 JakeOrion: *Sigh* And that is exactly what I hate. We lost out to a better product, so in order to prevent something like this again, make a better product! Don
120 7cubed: Now tell me how many jobs will be lost.
121 Bingo: Its not the British content I'd worry about..its the fuel content...Heaven forbid we put those starved anorexic engines and their fancy auto-throttle
122 FlyDeltaJets87: So for anyone who's saying they're glad politics was put aside when this decision was made, what makes you so sure? I'm not saying it's the case, but
123 Maiznblu_757: I didn't think it would win because I didnt think the US would buy Airbus over Boeing... That said, the 330 is the better choice of the two. Now, I d
124 AWACSooner: I'm sorry, I'm not trying to incite an A vs. B war here, but this decision really irks me for one reason and one reason only: As a military man, I am
125 Aircellist: Are there details yet about the building process? Will there really be Beluga's flights to Alabama? Where would they stop on the road? (consider YUL,
126 ACW367: Another plus for this deal is that NATO will be happy with the US Military. There will be NATO supply chain commonality with the future tanker fleets
127 Bjg231: Looks like Obama can tally up Washington as a lock. McCain won't have a snowball's chance in hell of carrying the state now.
128 Zeke: Very much so, I can see a lot of scope for a 737 and 777 sized tanker in the USAF. Yes, but I think that maybe best handled by a 772LR or 340-500. I
129 Bingo: Umm probably None or there abouts. See the thing youre not realizing is that the program was never launched. The only people who are really affected
130 7cubed: I think the issue is that we just signed a multi-billion dollar contract for new light heli's and the replacement if Marine one which are Agusta-west
131 Starrion: This is exactly what I am expecting. The US is losing an enormous amount of jobs by awarding this overseas. I hope the USAF has a backup plan because
132 Bingo: Yeah totally, I mean the whole Haliburton thing worked out so well...What was McCain thinking?
133 Starlionblue: The economy doesn't work that way. If you spend domestically all the time just because you can, you are likely to end up spending more. Competition a
134 ArniePie: That's the beauty of it ,you'll be able to fly all Airbii !!, that's what cockpit commonality will do for you. UA,US,NW,B6,F9,.... all the others fly
135 KennyK: If this contract gets flipped on its head by the politicians and Boeing comes out on top wait for the backlash from Europe, it wont be nice.
136 Connies4ever: Love it !!! But seriously folks (and not having read all of the posts in this thread, since I'm going out shortly), PERHAPS the KC-30 is simply the b
137 EGNR: I believe the Beluga fleet is already pretty stretched flying aircraft parts around Europe, and that's before Airbus increases its production rates.
138 Scbriml: I'm sure they did - they're not stupid. Yet, they still selected the KC-30. They must really like it.
139 Bingo: I felt the same way til I stopped and thought about it. A good chunk of the stuff that we use is foreign. This one just has the largest hood ornament
140 AWACSooner: No it won't. But I hope to God it DOES get flipped!
142 Scbriml: I'm sure you'll enjoy the ride in a KC-30.
143 Bingo: Youre a smart man JakeOrion, Welcome to my RU List. I agree, pick yourself up and try again... Ahh yes the theory. A great one at that. But if theory
144 Halls120: Except he'll never ride in a KC-30. He may, however, ride in an KC-45.
145 AirNZ: Ah! but if NG were mentioned people couldn't play the usual veiled protectionist card.......facts have to be distorted to suit. Forget to mention tha
146 ChrisNH: This may be overly simplistic, so please don't flame me if it is. But when these two camps went into the RFP process (Boeing & Northrop-Grumman), wasn
147 Bingo: No, I actually work for one of their competitors. But I did learn to read so I know how things really work.
148 SANChaser: Fair use excerpt : (http://www.eads.com/1024/en/pressdb/pressdb/EADS/20080229_eads_kc-30.html) Tom Enders, President and CEO of Airbus said: “Northr
149 NorCal: It seems like Boeing is becoming worse and worse of a player in the military market. It seems like they have lost the spark they had a long time ago
150 FlyDeltaJets87: I have to agree. I kind of wish the response from USAF to Boeing would have been "go design a better tanker", like turning the 777 into a tanker or i
153 AirTranTUS: I've never seen any hard data to prove this. In fact, in another thread, data proved the opposite. Look at the current KC-135's and NW DC-9's and B-5
154 Scbriml: DoD Press Release http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=49134
155 ACW367: Tanker deals so far 767 Won Japan (against A310) and Italy(against either 310 or 330). Deliveries to both countries are behind schedule with Boeing pa
156 Vega9000: Wow. I'm very very impressed. Not with the decision of the tanker by itself, but by the fact that the USAF has awarded one very big strategic order on
157 Asturias: Looking back at USAF purchase history, it isn't the biggest shocker of them all that Northrop Grumman was chosen to supply the Air Force. The USAF has
158 7cubed: It was a simple question, why so defensive? I'm going to wager everyone on this thread can read so congrats with your accomplishment.[Edited 2008-02-
159 NorCal: That would be nice, I also hope they use the A330-200F as the baseline
160 AirNZ: So tell me how this is different to parts being built in foreign factories and then snapped together for the 787? Why is it acceptable and an 'Americ
161 Drewfly: For those who are interested, here is the transcript from the press conference: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcrip.../transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4
162 ACW367: Northrop Grumman clearly provided the best value to the government,” Payton said, noting the Airbus-allied group’s plane earned superior marks for
163 Ikramerica: ABC Radio News is reporting it this way (just heard it driving home on the 8PM ET update, 5PM pacific): Paraphrasing: "Boeing lost the $40Billion doll
164 Scipio: It's hard to envisage the KC-767 winning any further orders now, so it seems that Japan and Italy will end up with small "orphan" fleets of KC-767s.
165 Halls120: Most of your post is dead on correct. And again, as I said earlier, congrats to NG. As other posters noted, this wasn't an easy decision politically
166 AutoThrust: Yes, Mobile, Alabama was chosen because there is a dock situated nearby the airfield and the runway is one of the longest in the US. Heard about 500
167 AirNZ: And also as a military man (ex-British Army) who fought alongside your own military I find your comment to be absolutely insulting to a great many pe
168 Scbriml: How did all the a.net experts get this so wrong?
169 Halls120: Now that the decision has been made, can we please ask all the people who delight in engaging in Airbus vs. Boeing flamefests to go back to the Civil
170 ACW367: Quoting AWACSooner As a military man, I am incredibly irate (actually, furious) that the US military is now, in essence supporting a company subsidize
171 Aither: Good for Northtrop/EADS The US has became cheap labor for Europe, I would not be surprised to see more A330 work, including for the pax version, being
172 Bingo: BRAVO!!!! Welcome to my RU List ! I'm sorry...i'll admit my response was a bit over the top. When I first read that; I was deeply hurt. I've been cal
173 Halls120: As a retired member of the US armed forces, I'm not going to defend the content or manner in which "Irate" made his point, because it was disrespectf
174 Zeke: That is correct, the aircraft will be assembled in an EADS North America facility, before being modified by NG in their facility. These will be NG pr
175 Centrair: Kind of freaky. Last night I was at dinner and was seated next to a Boeing guy who works on the 767, 777, 737 and 747 programs with Kawasaki Heavy. He
176 GDB: Wow, that's a shock. Politically brave too, in an election year, (which I'm sorry to say, all too often brings out xenophobia in some candidates to ce
177 Bingo: Please don’t take his comments to heart as he doesn’t represent anyone but himself. I think you will find that the vast majority of our men and w
178 Skeptic: that's the real lesson here. i guess i understand the carping of the boeing advocates today, over not just a loss but such a game-changing loss. but
179 AWACSooner: No, sadly, I'll have to watch the *** end of the plane as it refuels my BOEING plane. Edit: And I do have tremendous amount of respect for my fellow
180 7cubed: Don't sweat it, this was a heated debate from the first post. However, I wasn't calling you a lobbyist...just wondering if you were one. Sorry for th
181 ULMFlyer: Is this American company headquartered in Montréal, Québec?
182 Bingo: What industrial base do you speak of? Most of our industrial base was moved offshore when America said that everyone needed to have a college educati
183 7cubed: My guess is they're going to take this for all it's worth. Seeing that they'll be competing against McCain (at least it looks that way right now), I'
184 7cubed: So I guess we should throw whats left away and move it off-shore? We'll all be able to get jobs at Wal-Mart selling Chinese goods then.
185 Bingo: According to flightglobal's article: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...s-northrop-wins-kc-x-contract.html "Airbus will build the A330-200 sectio
186 Revelation: This just in from Hell: All flames are out, and ice is forming! As I stated in an earlier thread, now that the award has been made, the recriminations
187 AirRyan: There is no way the current Congress could veto the USAF KC-X bid as it is their absolute #1 priority. Ahh, we shouldn't... Absolutely - that's a min
188 Halls120: First off, you are trying to suggest that my post is anti A300 and A330. That is incorrect. Take Zeke's challenge and look at all of my posts on the
189 FlyingClrs727: Washington really hasn't been in play for several election cycles. I'm wondering if any of this would spill over into Oregon which has been pretty cl
190 STT757: I would like to add my comments to this thread, I hope with so many posts people will make it this far down in the thread to read them. 1.) I am a Boe
191 Bingo: All our manufacturing is moving overseas? Aren’t you getting a bit over zealous saying that? The JSF was a HUGE program and it’s being built here
192 7cubed: Please Bingo, tell me where it's built.
193 TropicBird: It has begun and will only get much worse....congressional hearings etc. "Congress in turmoil over Air Force tanker decision" http://www.reuters.com/a
194 TropicBird: They are already protesting in Everett...they appear to have printed signs at the ready. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/353313_tankereverett01
195 TropicBird: This contract was Boeing's to lose and as the days go by, it will become more evident of that. Boeing had other options which they chose to ignore and
196 Bingo: You dodged the question. How American do they have to be? How can you say this won’t net any jobs? For one, the people that build/assemble these pl
197 Mike89406: I just have to chime in working in Naval Aviation I know its slightly off topic but perhaps appropriate. 1st Caveat Boeing lost out to the X-35/F-35 M
198 Bingo: Well 7cubed, its built in many places then assembled in Washington State. Check out this picture for details http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/200
199 Scipio: This is not what is happening in this case. The US will be importing manufacturing capability. EADS will establish a new aircraft assembly line in th
200 M27: How do you explain that the Air Force can be so right on the tanker decision, yet so wrong on the CSAR-X?
201 RayChuang: Besides the obvious USAF order for circa 179 planes (which I think could be increased in theory up to 300 planes so we can completely replace the KC-1
202 7cubed: Sorry, my quote disappeared. This is in response to Bingo post 205 Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, these aircraft are to be completely made in AL? They'
203 Virgin747LGW: I'm very confused, the USAF has decided which aircraft is best for defending the US, now politicians want the decision over-ruled? Are they saying tha
204 Bingo: If thats your definition of building then the Airbus is "building" the tanker in Alabama.
205 Pnwtraveler: Oh great. Isnt Thales responsible for the AC inflight ptv system that crashes so often? [Edited 2008-02-29 20:01:03]
206 FlyDeltaJets87: Huh? These sort of decisions have already happened in Europe, with many European countries operating US-made aircraft in their militaries. Robins AFB
207 Bingo: It is my understanding that they are going to fly all the parts/sections for these planes to Alabama where they will be glued together. If I'm wrong
208 7cubed: It's not my definition and if they're flying the plane from France to Alabama they're not "Building" anything...they're modifying. Big difference.
209 Bingo: I agree. If they build it in France and fly it to Alabama to glue the boom on then that stinks...but everything I read says Airbus is going to fly se
210 7cubed: Well now I'm confused. My understanding was they were going to fly these to Mobile then mod them. If they're flying all the parts in from Europe for
211 7cubed: I didn't think there was that much demand for the 330 to add another line and I don't think the French unions would be happy with it either.
212 Bingo: http://www.eads.com/1024/en/pressdb/...ssdb/EADS/20080229_eads_kc-30.html Sounds like they are building it there in Alabama and even sending addition
213 Acheron: Its not being "built" in Seattle, but being assembled. Pretty much like the KC-30 is going to be. Parts are going to be built elsewhere then sent to
214 BHMBAGLOCK: They flew one over after Katrina but I don't know where it stopped. Might be N/S if this happens. This is possible. What port or ports in Europe woul
215 7cubed: Quoting Bingo (Reply 221): Despite all of this theres no pleasing you....lol... In this case, there's nothing pleasing about it. I just hope that othe
216 Halls120: If Airbus follows the lead of European and Japanese automakers and actually builds a real manufacturing plant in Mobile, with the product an airplane
217 MD-90: I told you guys not to underestimate the power of Richard Shelby to bring home the bacon to Alabama. He serves on the Appropriations Committee and the
218 Art: The 767 would doubtless meet the needs of the military but the military judge that the A330 would meet their needs better. Are you proposing that the
219 Bingo: Sure you can, me and half a dozen people have been doing that with you all night. I hope Boeing doesnt lose jobs. I'm a glass is half full kinda guy
220 Stitch: I expect they will. A lot more "man hours" are needed to assemble a 767 then an A330 because of the greater amount of pre-fabrication the A330 has. N
221 Flighty: The 767 have had a very good 30 year run. Although the 767 is a great airplane, Boeing did not deserve to win. Its PR was arrogant through the whole
222 707lvr: In over 230 posts, we've barely touched the surface of what is going on with this contract. Most of it you'll never know. I only hope Boeing doesn't w
223 Planemaker: I know that it is many posts later but... I didn't realize that La Fayette, François Joseph Paul de Grasse & Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, et al. w
224 Scipio: Every Airbus has a parts content that is to a very significant extent US-sourced. Aircraft are not high-volume products, so having multiple sources f
225 Aerobalance: Tell me... Where are the profits going? I mean for the sale of the a/c itself, not the subassemblies. Tax dollars were up for grabs, a majority of th
226 Scipio: From all we know, the Northrop-EADS team seems to have worked much harder to secure this contract than the Boeing team. And they started from a super
227 Starlionblue: "Bingo". China is already that developed, or almost. The reasons why the Chinese don't for head on competition are too complex to explain here. That
228 LOT767-300ER: Let me ask this of America, when are we going to stop whining and start again making products that whip everyones ass instead of crying on the stool
229 Astuteman: A pretty significant point, ACW367. Funnily enough, I used to get pissed off at all the Japanese (and other nationalities) factories getting built he
230 AutoThrust: And the 787 and other programs were not highly subsidized? May not be bad? Apart it was spent to develop the A330 not the tanker which was paid back
231 Columba: Which plane competed against the KC 10 ? I would say the US has gone transatlantic, the A330 is a European (not a French) aircraft are made in the US
232 KennyK: It is interesting to see how the BBC are reporting this announcement, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7272272.stm A large number of UK jobs will b
233 Azhobo: How can anyone say this, they are busy going after Roger Clemens for heavens sake. As far as the competition goes, I dont blame anyone but Boeing if
234 Azhobo: And 60+ Longbow Apaches which were mostly assembled in the UK! Which I worked on here in the states. I am glad for the UK on this acquisition, as I s
235 Ebbuk: If ever there was a decision steeped in politics, this one is it. That it is announced at this point of the election fever is not a coincidence. Very
236 Starlionblue: I think the main issue is a belief by Americans (yes I have lived there 5 years) that American stuff is the best. Now, I'm not saying some American p
237 AirNZ: That's interesting, and perhaps you should pass the message on to some of your colleagues.......the Boeing pom-pom girls throughout the thread who ar
238 Columba: http://www.usatoday.com/money/topstories/2008-03-01-1508578782_x.htm This is funny because many people here on a.net have claimed the large size of t
239 Columba: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/29/air.force.tankers/index.html I think these are some really good arguments in favor for the A330
240 AirNZ: And what exactly do you see wrong in that? The world does not revolve around American, but that's the problem many of you have. Ah! I see, you have p
241 Papanovember: That's in the fine print somewhere...
242 Gorgos: Next time, Boeing will be sure to make a better offer. Anybody who thinks Boeing makes the DoD a good offer when it is aware of the fact it is the on
243 Srbmod: With this thread getting quite long (close to 250 replies), please continue the discussion here: Usaf Decided On KC-30 Part 2. (by Srbmod Mar 1 2008 i
Sponsor Message: 
.gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Jun 2001, 710 posts, 
From United States, joined Apr 2004, 3113 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Jan 2004, 1024 posts, 
From Norway, joined Dec 2006, 79 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
So yes EADS won as well. 
From France, joined Mar 2005, 1381 posts, 
From Romania, joined Sep 2005, 301 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Jun 2006, 3160 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
