keesje
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 6:23 am

Airbus will decide by June 23 whether it will choose Charleston or one of three other Southern port cities to build a refueling jet for the U.S. Air Force.
Officials from its parent, European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., this week are touring the finalists: Charleston, Mobile, Ala., Melbourne, Fla., and Gulfport, Miss.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/breaking_news/11717450.htm
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
LMP737
Posts: 4853
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 6:39 am

Don't they have to get the contract first?
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 6:57 am

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 1):
Don't they have to get the contract first?

No. In fact they need a site first to be able to include it in their proposal. Also they need local and state officials lined up to support their bid.
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 6:57 am

might want to read this, I think hell will freeze before we see an A330 tanker in USAF colors

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...5.story?coll=la-headlines-business
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5019
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 7:34 am

Quoting NorCal (Reply 3):

Why do you think that? Europe got lots of US fighters, UK got Globemaster and many EU countrys got KC130, so I dont see the problem w/ a A330-Tanker in US. KC-767 got 2 (Japan & Italy)..

Micke//SE  Yeah sure
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 9:29 am

Well, if you read the article you would see that a European product built by a company that did not use subsidies to gain competitive advantages would be welcome to bid.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 9:44 am

That bill isn't exactly law yet. The Full House is going to have to approve, then Senate, and to W for signature. A lot can happen between now and then. So EADS is wise to have it's ducks in a row. Even if the odds are less than 10% for EADS, the contract is multi billion dollars - more with extensions.
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
bennett123
Posts: 7456
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 9:49 am

Does the bill bar a company that receives subsidies according to the WTO or according to the US Govt.

Also how does it define subsidies.
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5019
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 10:41 am

When (and if) they build an Airbus Plant on US soil *god forbid*, what a/c are they going to be on the production line?

KC-330 n 318-321 n 330/340???

Micke//SE  Confused
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 10:41 am

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 6):
That bill isn't exactly law yet. The Full House is going to have to approve, then Senate, and to W for signature. A lot can happen between now and then.

You're right it hasn't become law yet, but American politics is what it is. If either the Democrats or the Republicans vote to give Airbus the contract, expect an uproar and political spin from the otherside. (could you imagine what O'Reily would say if the Democrats approved the KC-330?) The American public will view this as outsourcing jobs, (b/c of the negative spin put on it) DESPITE the fact that the KC-330 will be built in America if Airbus wins. It'll still be seen as American money going to a European company, and eitherside will use this for their advantage (especially the Democrats since they are hurting bad) to increase their political power.

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Why do you think that?

I have no problem with a KC-330, I just don't think it will happen b/c of political reasons. Plus weather this is true or not (I don't know) I've heard that the KC-330 would be too big for the Air Force from people who are currently enlisted and serving.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 5):
Well, if you read the article you would see that a European product built by a company that did not use subsidies to gain competitive advantages would be welcome to bid.

Exactly
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 11:54 am

Quoting NorCal (Reply 9):
You're right it hasn't become law yet, but American politics is what it is. If either the Democrats or the Republicans vote to give Airbus the contract, expect an uproar and political spin from the otherside. (could you imagine what O'Reily would say if the Democrats approved the KC-330?) The American public will view this as outsourcing jobs, (b/c of the negative spin put on it) DESPITE the fact that the KC-330 will be built in America if Airbus wins. It'll still be seen as American money going to a European company, and eitherside will use this for their advantage (especially the Democrats since they are hurting bad) to increase their political power.

Which is great except that it has exactly zip to do with EADS being prepared to execute on the 1 in 10 chance (IMO) it gets the job -- which is what the thread is about.

There are any number of other threads on the politics of the matter.....
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 2:23 pm

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 10):
Which is great except that it has exactly zip to do with EADS being prepared to execute on the 1 in 10 chance (IMO) it gets the job -- which is what the thread is about.

Is EADS still going to build the plant in America even if they don't get the contract? I thought the whole idea behind putting the plant in America was to win the contract. Yes I guess they could take advantage of the weak dollar to lower costs, but it won't stay weak forever. Would it be cheaper to build them in America instead of the EU even if the dollar and euro are equal?

It is highly unlikely that Airbus will get this contract, and if this bill passes than there is no chance.
 
columba
Posts: 5045
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 3:34 pm

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 8):
When (and if) they build an Airbus Plant on US soil *god forbid*, what a/c are they going to be on the production line?

KC-330 n 318-321 n 330/340???

Micke//SE

Only the airframes for the tanker.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 3:34 pm

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Europe got lots of US fighters

Yeah but if memory serves, Europe made General Dynamics build them in the Netherlands.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
saintsman
Posts: 2037
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2002 12:34 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 4:07 pm

Tell me a major company that doesn't get subsidies in one way or another. Tax breaks, grants etc

Take cars for example. How many foreign manufactures have manufacturing plants in the US or the UK? They are not there just because its cheaper than shipping them from Japan. Its the same with electronics.

Of course Boeing has never received any subsidies? right.

Has anyone asked the workers in the proposed areas what they think? Long term jobs in the south for them or no jobs but the US buys Boeings made thousands of miles away. What would your choice really be?

At the end of the day the US are not going to buy A330s and no 767s. There's enough required for a mixed fleet and you still cant get away from the fact that the Airbus is a technologically more advanced aircraft. I would have though that the US would want the best it could get, especially from an aircraft that is likely to be flying 30+ years from now.
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 5:18 pm

Quoting NorCal (Reply 11):
Is EADS still going to build the plant in America even if they don't get the contract? I thought the whole idea behind putting the plant in America was to win the contract

We're talking site selection folks, not plant construction.....

If EADS does not commit to a site then they can't count on support from the local politicos when it comes to contract award.....
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5019
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 8:57 pm

If the KC-330 is to big as you say than what is KC-10? Similar size, and the KC-707(?) is +45 years old so its high time to chance those KC´s soon IMHO!

Just my  twocents 

Micke//SE Big grin
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Tue May 24, 2005 11:05 pm

Any particular reason it has to be a port ? Are they going to send the bits over from Europe on a barge (cf. A380 ) ?
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 12:25 am

Quoting Saintsman (Reply 14):
hey are not there just because its cheaper than shipping them from Japan.

Yes, they are. Corporations like that do things in order to generate more money. Wages and other labor costs, in conjunction with real estate and higher variable costs rose high enough in Japan that it made sense to build the new factories right in their biggest market. Same goes for other manufacturers. They are locating their factories in economically depressed areas where they don't have to pay as much as they would to support someone who lives in a metro area in their home country. Even Hyundai has done this, giving some indication about what it costs to operate in Asia.

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 16):
If the KC-330 is to big as you say than what is KC-10? Similar size, and the KC-707(?

Two different airplanes for two different missions. The KC-10s will be there for a long time to come.

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 17):
Any particular reason it has to be a port ? Are they going to send the bits over from Europe on a barge (cf. A380 )

There is no canal system here in the States as there is in Europe where they can viably ship large objects by canal and land. The distance for the Beluga is too far, and they are previously occupied anyway. The proximity to a port is in order to ease logistics, rather than complicate them.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 12:37 am

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 16):
If the KC-330 is to big as you say than what is KC-10? Similar size, and the KC-707(?) is +45 years old so its high time to chance those KC´s soon IMHO!

I'll say it once again. Its politics, the KC-330 might be a superior a/c (I don't know) but politicians don't care. They are going to make whatever deal they think will make them look the best. I believe that it will be the KC-767 that will make them look the best on the political arena. It doesn't have to make sense b/c its politics.
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 2:54 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 18):
There is no canal system here in the States as there is in Europe where they can viably ship large objects by canal and land.

Tell that to the dock workers in St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Duluth, MN. Heck, Duluth even handles ocean going ships.  Smile
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 4:59 am

Yeah, you have a point with that. The difference is that you can barge a load up canals across what for us would be the plains states, whereas the areas you are talking about are either off of North Americas largest river or near the GReat Lakes.

I think that if the argument were to be made the ports with direct access to the sea would still be logistically easier as there is less transfer of cargo. I am not an expert on moving the large pieces they are discussing, but I'd have to say its easier to take them right off the docks and move them 2 or 3 miles to a manufacturing facility.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 5:34 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 21):
The difference is that you can barge a load up canals across what for us would be the plains states, whereas the areas you are talking about are either off of North Americas largest river or near the GReat Lakes.

Much of the barge traffic in Europe is based off the Rhein river....

Quoting DL021 (Reply 21):
I think that if the argument were to be made the ports with direct access to the sea would still be logistically easier as there is less transfer of cargo. I am not an expert on moving the large pieces they are discussing, but I'd have to say its easier to take them right off the docks and move them 2 or 3 miles to a manufacturing facility.

I'm guessing here but I have to believe that it would be cheaper and simpler for EADS to simply extend the Beluga runs to the U.S. Letting a 10 or 20 million dollar fuselage section spend a week/10 days on a boat is going to eat their lunch over a 15-20 year production run.

Site selection will probably have as much to do with taxes/jobs as logistics anyway...  Smile
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
keesje
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 6:14 am

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 20):
Heck, Duluth even handles ocean going ships.

From Dulth (nice bridge btw) they would need sleigh´s in the winter months..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
bennett123
Posts: 7456
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 7:15 am

L188

If F16's built in Holland, (and Belgium) why not KC330 in the US.
 
LMP737
Posts: 4853
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 7:22 am

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 16):
If the KC-330 is to big as you say than what is KC-10? Similar size, and the KC-707(?) is +45 years old so its high time to chance those KC´s soon IMHO!

You seem to forget Solnabo that the KC-330 is not meant as a replacement for the KC-10.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 12:22 pm

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 22):
I'm guessing here but I have to believe that it would be cheaper and simpler for EADS to simply extend the Beluga runs to the U.S. Letting a 10 or 20 million dollar fuselage section spend a week/10 days on a boat is going to eat their lunch over a 15-20 year production run.

I think I read somewhere that the range on the Beluga is very limited. I wonder what the cost/benefit is for sending via air versus by ship/rail. Boeing sends the fuselages by rail across the Rockies and it must be cost effective for them to do so.

Is time spent in transhipment an issue once the production schedule is set, if the just in time delivery schedule is done properly?

Any logistics experts out there?
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 2:09 pm

I think one of the biggest downsides for a tanker based on the A330-200 design is the fact the large wingspan of the A332 means you can park less planes side-by-side at airport ramps. The 767-200(ER) with its smaller wingspan means more of them could be parked at airport ramps, especially at smaller airports.

I still think Boeing is seriously looking at building a tanker for the USAF based on a modified 787-3 design.
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 2:54 pm

Quoting DL021 (Reply 5):
Well, if you read the article you would see that a European product built by a company that did not use subsidies to gain competitive advantages would be welcome to bid.

So who is going to build it then if Airbus and Boeing can't?

All jokes aside, Airbus have orders for this plane so its not going to make a difference by setting aside a site for it!
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
saintsman
Posts: 2037
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2002 12:34 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 3:48 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 27):
I think one of the biggest downsides for a tanker based on the A330-200 design is the fact the large wingspan of the A332 means you can park less planes side-by-side at airport ramps. The 767-200(ER) with its smaller wingspan means more of them could be parked at airport ramps, especially at smaller airports.

That is obviously true, but have you seen the size of American airfields. They don't make them small and military airbases around the world wouldn't be too inconvenienced. The other thing about the A330 is the fuel load they carry is enough to support most operations even without the need for additional fuel tanks. The RAF aircraft will not have tanks fitted but there is no reason a potential US aircraft cant have them fitted, especially if they were used as dedicated tankers.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed May 25, 2005 10:51 pm

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 24):
If F16's built in Holland, (and Belgium) why not KC330 in the US.

They got a better deal in that they got technology transfer, they were able to build up their aerospace industry, and they got technically advanced combat aircraft.

Industrially the US would not benefit from the KC-330, as it would only end up transferring some jobs from one part of the country to another while eliminating some more jobs, and furthermore offsets for manufacturing the KC-330 would not advance the state of the US aerospace industry technologywise as the base aircraft does not represent a leap over anything available domestically.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
starrion
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:19 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Thu May 26, 2005 4:30 am

I thought the original plan was for the airframes to be completed in Europe and then flown over under their own power for tanker conversion at the new plant.

That would make it much simpler for Airbus but mean far fewer jobs than a KC767
Knowledge Replaces Fear
 
SATL382G
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:02 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Thu May 26, 2005 9:41 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 26):
I think I read somewhere that the range on the Beluga is very limited. I wonder what the cost/benefit is for sending via air versus by ship/rail. Boeing sends the fuselages by rail across the Rockies and it must be cost effective for them to do so.

Beluga can't stop for gas? I know they've used it to deliver some European payloads to Kennedy Space Center.

The 737 fuses go by rail from plant to plant vs port to port so that's a bit more efficient. Boeing also pays a premium for outsized cargo. I bet they get get hot shot service with 48hr delivery.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 26):
Is time spent in transhipment an issue once the production schedule is set, if the just in time delivery schedule is done properly?

The trick as I see it is this: Figure a $20 million aircraft part. Lets say Beluga saves us 9 days transit time vs a ship. How much interest would we have to pay or lose on that $20M part over the 9 extra days a ship takes? Multiply that by the number of units to be delivered, then compound over the life of the program. Plus we'd need to figure what that cost would be for an entire shipset not just one part. Then add the transhipment cost between port and plant (I'm assuming Beluga would deliver direct to plant).

I know we'd need to figure the direct costs for ship & Beluga. I could take an educated guess for Beluga, but have no idea for ship. Would depend too on the total value of cargo we could haul with one Beluga.
"There’s nothing quite as exhilarating as being shot at and missed" --Winston Churchill
 
keesje
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Thu May 26, 2005 7:13 pm

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 1):
Don't they have to get the contract first?

lets not forget it is " A site selection process for an engineering centre and possible production facility for the US tanker "

http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=64333&src=0

There will be an engineering center (250 people) anyway.

Getting the tanker or not will not change long term strategy, they will go for the next project (maybe a A330/340 cargo conversion center or a US Airbus MRO base).
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
A5XX
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 10:36 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:04 am

Quoting NorCal (Reply 19):
ll say it once again. Its politics, the KC-330 might be a superior a/c (I don't know) but politicians don't care. They are going to make whatever deal they think will make them look the best. I believe that it will be the KC-767 that will make them look the best on the political arena. It doesn't have to make sense b/c its politics.

Absolutely! I probably won't live long enough to see an Airbus built plane (like the KC-330 or whatever they call it) in the Air Force inventory, as the American public would view this as a french conspiracy to takeover the United States.

Then again, the A380 would be a great replacement for Air Force one!      

  

I found the following article, very interesting, given the war on subsidies that Boeing has recently declared against Airbus.   

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...06/06/AR2005060601715.html?sub=new

Yves.

[Edited 2005-06-08 02:06:35]

[Edited 2005-06-08 02:13:16]
we are the boeing... resistance is futile...You will be assimilated
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:11 am

When people whine about it being a cold day in hell before the US buys tankers from EADS, it reaks of ignorant hypocrisy.

Even after we remind them of similar such purchases in the past such as the AV-8 Harrier for the Marines, Dolphin helo for the Coast Guard, and of course the exact same thing as what the KC-330 program is, the US-101 helo for the US President based off the EH-101, a British and Italian helo.

You see, the US consumer has sold out to the best product at the lowest price years ago and this is evidenced by the masses who do business at Wal-Mart everyday whose majority of products come from outside the United States. Also worth pointing out is in the vehicle that people drive - not only do foreign auto makers sell many, many vehicles such as Honda, Toyota, Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, and Volkswagen, but many foreign automakers have created successful assembly plants into the United States such as Hyundai, Toyota, and Honda.

So you see, when ulterior-motivated politicans on both sides of the party line try and evoke invalid and flat out irresponsible claims against the KC-330 being made here in the United States, even going so far as to eliminate the competition before it's allowed to even compete by enacting anti-American legislation, totally going against the grain of the capitalism our democracy is suppossed to be all about, well if that isn't hypocrisy I don't know what is.

The taxpayer and our men and women of the USAF defending the Nation deserve the best product for their money, and if that is the KC-330 and not the KC-767, an aircraft no single commerical air carrier will ever buy again because of it's outdated design, than I would like to think the US is wise enough to spend the money wisely.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tank

Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:55 pm

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 35):

You see, the US consumer has sold out to the best product at the lowest price years ago

That's not selling out, that's getting the best deal you can. It's a good thing.


Mobile might have an advantage, since Richard Shelby is a senior senator with lots of influence, but hopefully EADS won't talk to Mercedes about their problems with the M-class plant in Alabama.
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:22 pm

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 36):
That's not selling out, that's getting the best deal you can. It's a good thing.

I meant that somewhat sarcastically, but sometimes it's hard to convey via the internet!

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 36):
Mobile might have an advantage, since Richard Shelby is a senior senator with lots of influence, but hopefully EADS won't talk to Mercedes about their problems with the M-class plant in Alabama.

Are we inferring to the inherient problems with attracting the desired qualified individuals to Ala-BAM-a?!
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed Jun 08, 2005 3:25 pm

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 35):
an aircraft no single commerical air carrier will ever buy again because of it's outdated design

I think it is a rather large assumption that the reasons for the decline in interest in 767s from commercial air carriers reflects on its suitability for Air Force operations. A 767 fuselage shape with 787 technology would likely have a bit of trouble selling in the commercial market now that the A330 LD3 capacity has become a key differentiator.


Quoting AirRyan (Reply 35):
totally going against the grain of the capitalism our democracy is suppossed to be all about

Military purchases have never had much to do with capitalism. The development and sale of military products is highly regulated and very dependent on government funding. Considerations regarding industrial issues and maintenance of domestic manufacturing and design capabilities are strong considerations in miltary purchase decisions. Exports are controlled by the US government.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
A5XX
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 10:36 pm

RE: Airbus To Decide By June 23 On Jet Plant, Tanker

Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:24 pm

The USAF will never buy an Airbus made tanker. PERIOD.

1: Even if the Airbus Tankers were the best they could get.

2: Even if they could get them for free...

Yves.
we are the boeing... resistance is futile...You will be assimilated

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests