Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:48 pm

AKA "discovery by another means". If Airbus wants the deal, they have to comply; if they comply, what will be the impact on the WTO case? Brilliant negotiating ploy IMO. The U.S. has linked the subsidies issue and WTO case to one of the crown jewels of military contracts--the USAF tanker deal. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Air Force wants details on Airbus subsidies
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:52 am

The USAF wants this information, not some politicians or lobbyists ? I thought all THEY wanted was the tanker which suits them best. But obviously the USAF don´t thinks this is important anymore, but politics are. Leaving the "subsidies" apart now, maybe the USAF has shot in the foot of Boeing. Watch out for European politicians asking Boeing about their subsidies when there is a military competition running in which Boeing takes part.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:04 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 1):
The USAF wants this information, not some politicians or lobbyists ? I

I doubt the USAF wants it! This is linkage to the WTO case. Like it or not, it ups the ante and puts Airbus in a very uncomfortable position. Will they respond, or tell the U.S. government that they are not interested in submitting a bid under these conditions? If they respond, will that satisfy the tender, or will they be accused of being "evasive" or "not sufficiently forthcoming"? Remember, no good lawyer ever asks a question of a witness in which he/she doesn't already know the answer.

USAF would want the best tanker. However, this is part and parcel of the larger issue. We live in a very political world, and this subsidies issue rankles in Washington DC. One can point the finger, accuse Boeing of the same thing, etc., but the fact remains that the U.S.(AF) is in the driver's seat on the bid. It's their money and they can set the conditions. Where this will lead, who knows? Personally, I hope it leads to a negotiated settlement in the WTO case, and the USAF getting the best aircraft at the best price. However, I'm not that naive....

EDIT: Another question just occurred to me. Given that EADS is also a player for the Future Cargo Aircraft (potentially up to 200 airframes), will the same condition for "subsidies disclosure" show up in that RFP?  hissyfit 

[Edited 2006-04-26 21:12:45]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:33 am

Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

Its like an employer asking what underwear you wear, some questions just arent relevent to the position or contract sought.

Airbus could also create a wholey funded subsidiary company to respond to the RFP producing airframes under license or purchasing a set number of airframes, and thus dodge the entire issue.

There are plenty of ways around this politically based request.

Alternatively, Airbus can simply give them what they want. After all, Airbuses position is that the funding is legitimate and legal, and they would have nothing to hide.
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:58 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

They could, but the counter argument is that the subsidies creat an unfair advantage, distort the true cost, etc., etc. Personally, I think EADS wants to avoid any kind of litigation on this, but I could be wrong.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could also create a wholey funded subsidiary company to respond to the RFP producing airframes under license or purchasing a set number of airframes, and thus dodge the entire issue.

Don't you mean "wholly owned"? Isn't this what they want to do with their partnership with Northrup Grumman?

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Alternatively, Airbus can simply give them what they want.

Probably the best course of action if EADS wants to remain a viable contender, but as I noted earlier, I believe this whole thing is a "discovery" action. How much information will they want to give?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:17 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 1):
Watch out for European politicians asking Boeing about their subsidies when there is a military competition running in which Boeing takes part.

And precisely which airplanes made by Boeing are the European EADS nations trying to purchase, or considering purchasing?
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:22 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP

Airbus can't do squat. It would have to be Northrop as the primer contractor.

And I'm not sure it would go down well because it would look like they have something to hide.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:26 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

Who is funding a supplier of military hardware is of itself a persuasive requirement.

The Government has every interest in knowing that they are procuring from a secure and dependable source. Tracing the money trail back to it's origins helps to determine how dependable the supplier may be in critical situations.

Discovering late in a program that your weapons are being made by your potential enemy is not a happy discovery.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:27 am

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 6):
And I'm not sure it would go down well because it would look like they have something to hide.

On one level I agree with you here. This is going to be a political deal. The politicians are going to want "full disclosure". Remember, the EADS lobby (if there is one) isn't going to have much influence with either party, particularly in an election year.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 5):
And precisely which airplanes made by Boeing are the European EADS nations trying to purchase, or considering purchasing?

Considering that the EADS is bidding the Future Cargo Aircraft they will want to tread carefully. Last I looked, the UK selected the 330 tanker, and I'm not aware of any pending military purchases by Germany, France, or Spain that involve Boeing.

IMO, this is a clever move to link the tanker deal with the WTO case....

[Edited 2006-04-26 22:45:25]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:35 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

Probably, another reason (in addition to the ones I listed in Reply#4) that EADS doesn't want this in court is that this would be an even better discovery vehicle than the RFP. There would be disclosure motions, subpoenas, etc. It would be a first class mess.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5257
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:46 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

There is no assurance that the US court would rule in Airbus' favor.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
echster
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 4:01 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:40 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

That would be one big-ass mistake. They would open themselves up to reciprocal discovery. The US and Boeing would have access to their most essential documents then, to include individual aircraft prices and other like proprietary information. Don't forget any internal emails that even hint at the word "tanker".

Airbus and Northrup will either give the information or they won't submit a bid. Not many ways around this in the USA on a legal standpoint.
 
wingman
Posts: 2829
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:01 pm

This whole saga is just pointless. EADS, let's face it, is a consortium of European countries that, excluding the UK's BAe group (soon to removed from EADS ownership), is French, German, and Spanish. Two thoughts come immediately to mind: first, outside of Spain buying a hanful of MD F-18's in the early 1980's, none of these three countries has ever procured such a massive military system (as a % of total annual defense expenditure) from the US. Think about the political firestorm that would ensue in any of these three countries if they had. We have choppers here, missiles there, secondary systems here, secondary systems there...but not a gargantuan "in your face" tens of billions of dollars-type military program. I think it is beyond comprehension for anyone in this day and age, with relations so poisoned amongst the 4 four countries in question to think that Airbus will get a piece of this action. It is politically inconceivable, and I posit that this entire tanker RFP is nothing but a charade, just like France, Germany or Spain inviting LM to respond to fighetr jet RFP's with the F-22 or F-35 would be a charade. Many people will argue that the 330 may be the best overall choice from a variety of standpoints. But have you ever seen a weapons procurement exercise in the US that made any logical sense? It's all about the pork barrel, pass the bacon around, and it's no different in Europe. Just look at at the EU fighter jet situation, the tank situation, the carrier situation, submarines, guns, ammo etc etc. Every country wants their major weapons programs to be their own shit, it's complete economic and military lunacy...but it's reality and it probably won't change much in the 21st Century.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 1:25 pm

Wingman got it dead on. There is no way EADS will even have a off chance of winning this order unless in some political deal, the US would have to give this to EADS as a peace offering to the EU.

I doubt that will happen.

GO KC-787!  biggrin   hyper   laughing 
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:00 pm

Quoting DL021 (Reply 5):
And precisely which airplanes made by Boeing are the European EADS nations trying to purchase, or considering purchasing?

None at the moment, but in the near future Spain and France will need new tankers. However, I don´t expect Boeing even to take part in the French competition, because the result is quite clear if no funding questions arrise.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:45 pm

Quoting A342 (Reply 1):
The USAF wants this information, not some politicians or lobbyists ? I thought all THEY wanted was the tanker which suits them best. But obviously the USAF don´t thinks this is important anymore, but politics are. Leaving the "subsidies" apart now, maybe the USAF has shot in the foot of Boeing. Watch out for European politicians asking Boeing about their subsidies when there is a military competition running in which Boeing takes part.

Well I was going to say that there is a lot of USAF influence in Washington because there are a healthy amount of politicians who are former Air Force, but EADS North American keeps flaunting in the back of AvLeak this black female with her PhD in Aero/Space Engineering who also is a Major in the USAF, Reserve as their current "Who is EADS?" Personally, I think they are playing the PC card on that one, though.

While I definately want the best product for the USAF, I hope all the A330 does is simply force the USAF to come up with a KC-777 to either supplement a KC-767 buy or outright replace it.
 
Oryx
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:25 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 12:42 am

Quoting Wingman (Reply 12):
none of these three countries has ever procured such a massive military system (as a % of total annual defense expenditure) from the US.



Germany: Lokheed F104G, McDonnell Douglas F-4F Phantom II, Bell UH-1D, Patriot - all big items for our small defence budget.

OK lately most shopping is done at EADS but for the last 50 years Germany bought a lot of equipement in the USA.

[Edited 2006-04-27 17:44:18]

[Edited 2006-04-27 17:44:55]
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:31 am

Quoting Oryx (Reply 16):
OK lately most shopping is done at EADS but for the last 50 years Germany bought a lot of equipement in the USA

Unfortunately, it is a "what have you done for me (us) lately" situation....
 Wink
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
TropicBird
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:13 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:04 am

I believe a key point is being missed here. Northrup Grumman/EADS is not required to respond to any portion of the Request for Information (RFI). This is not the a "bid" to build an Air Tanker, it is only a process where by the USAF learns what capabilities are out there.

I personally fail to see how a bidder(s) being subsidized on an aircraft (that is already in production) can have any direct bearing on this procurement. If they fail to answer that question in the RFI sufficiently or even at all does not disqualify them from bidding on the final "Request for Proposals" (RFP) as so stated in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (Sub-part 15.201(e) & 15.202(b)).

The USAF and Congress may not like it but they can still bid on the contract and the price and capabilities will be what matters in the end.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5257
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:13 am

Quoting TropicBird (Reply 18):
If they fail to answer that question in the RFI sufficiently or even at all does not disqualify them from bidding on the final "Request for Proposals" (RFP) as so stated in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (Sub-part 15.201(e) & 15.202(b)).

Would such failure not lead to them being deemed "non-responsive" and their subsequent bid passed over?
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:57 am

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 19):
Would such failure not lead to them being deemed "non-responsive" and their subsequent bid passed over?

   Absolutely!
IMO, EADS doesn't have any good choices here. They can either comply or withdraw. A court case is a non-starter for reasons noted earlier.

[Edited 2006-04-27 21:01:05]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
TropicBird
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:13 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:49 am

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 19):
Quoting TropicBird (Reply 18):
If they fail to answer that question in the RFI sufficiently or even at all does not disqualify them from bidding on the final "Request for Proposals" (RFP) as so stated in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (Sub-part 15.201(e) & 15.202(b)).

Would such failure not lead to them being deemed "non-responsive" and their subsequent bid passed over?

No..because the law does not require them to respond to the "RFI" to bid on the "RFP". The (2) part process is not tied together.

As I stated before, not submitting a response to the RFI does not disqualify someone from bidding on the contract. It does mean that your idea (aircraft in this case) may not be included only because the USAF is not aware of what you can offer them. I do not see how anyone's ability to provide an aircraft that is fully capable of meeting the contract, will not be considered because they did not answer a question about subsidies (especially since it is after the fact).

I can see where that concern is legitimate [if] EADS had to go out and find financing for a new model aircraft to compete on this contract. However, in this instance, that is not the case. Both EADS's possible candidate's (A330 & 340) are mature aircraft in the commercial sector.

BTW...I should mention that I hope a Boeing aircraft is ultimately selected.
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:29 am

Quoting TropicBird (Reply 21):
No..because the law does not require them to respond to the "RFI" to bid on the "RFP". The (2) part process is not tied together.

While you are technically correct, the RFI will most likely set the stage for the RFP. This is likely to be decided, after a thorough technical evaluation, on best value. The disclosure can come now or later. If they don't respond in the RFI phase, then you can be certain this requirement will be contained in the RFP, where failure to disclose WILL be considered "nonresponsive". Then there is the politics. Should EADS refuse to respond to the subsidies issue in the RFI, you can bet that this will be noticed in the Congress and the press. This can still be "sole sourced".

The FAR is a very complicated document. In my experience you may think you have an answer "nailed down", only to discover there is more info in another Part or Section. Then there is the DFAR, and I'm sure the USAF has their own implementing guidance. If I have some spare time in the next few days, I'll check it out.

Again, as I noted previously on this thread, I believe this is more tied to the WTO case than the tanker competition. You use what leverage you have....
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
petertenthije
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:00 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:16 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 5):
And precisely which airplanes made by Boeing are the European EADS nations trying to purchase, or considering purchasing

There is still a lot of interest in the JSF, although that is dropping due to tech-transfer and workshare issues. A few countries have shown interest in C-17s. Probably contracts/interest for missiles as well but I am not up to date on that.
Attamottamotta!
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5257
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
This can still be "sole sourced".

And there it begins to get distasteful. Although sufficient, even elaborate safeguards are in place, there is nothing like good, old competition to bring out the best in a procurement action.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:07 am

I was reading this and it got me thinking - saying the U.S. shouldn't buy planes actively involved in a trade dispute would also mean Boeing's aircraft, as there is a WTO dispute about that, too. Or is he painting things with two brushes?

http://money.iwon.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt...=20060428&alias=/alias/money/cm/nw

Quote:
Dicks, who represents workers at would-be tanker provider Boeing Co. (BA) (BA), said the U.S. shouldn't buy planes actively involved in a trade dispute.



Quoting DL021 (Reply 5):
And precisely which airplanes made by Boeing are the European EADS nations trying to purchase, or considering purchasing?

France is looking to replace their KC-135 (or whatever they call them) soon with new tankers. Then there are all the C-17 and C-130 offers. But most of these countries are buying the A400M already. Then a few bits and bobs (not aircraft)

Quoting Wingman (Reply 12):
excluding the UK's BAe group (soon to removed from EADS ownership

BAE never owned a share in EADS, they own 20% of Airbus jointly with EADS owning the rest.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:14 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 4):
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP, and the USAF would have to come up with a valid and persuasive reason for requiring the information.

They could, but the counter argument is that the subsidies creat an unfair advantage, distort the true cost, etc., etc. Personally, I think EADS wants to avoid any kind of litigation on this, but I could be wrong.

All this is froo-froo. It is the Congress who is pushing the issue, undoubtedly with Boeing lobbyists in the wings. If Airbus does not comply and tries to go to court, Congress will simply refuse to fund the purchase.

The Congress is still very angry over the reaction Bush got from both France and Germany with regard to Iraq II. 2,500 dead American boys and girls doesn't help either. It is pay back time.

Frankly, I think Airbus should simply no bid and save themselves the grief.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:18 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 26):
Frankly, I think Airbus should simply no bid and save themselves the grief.

There are about 95 senators and 520+ congresspersons in Washington DC that would be inclined to agree with you.  biggrin 

IMO, this is simply about leverage in the WTO case.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:39 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 26):
The Congress is still very angry over the reaction Bush got from both France and Germany with regard to Iraq II. 2,500 dead American boys and girls doesn't help either. It is pay back time.

So you suggest Germany and France should have traded tankers for dead soldiers or what ???

I´m sorry, but the politicians in the government at that time in both Germany and France weren´t so extremely stupid like Bush.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:21 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 28):
Quoting Poitin (Reply 26):
The Congress is still very angry over the reaction Bush got from both France and Germany with regard to Iraq II. 2,500 dead American boys and girls doesn't help either. It is pay back time.

So you suggest Germany and France should have traded tankers for dead soldiers or what ???

I´m sorry, but the politicians in the government at that time in both Germany and France weren´t so extremely stupid like Bush.

Hey, if you have a problem with the bad feelings that exist in the US Congress and Senate, then I think you should take it up with them. They are the ones who will vote on the appropriation.

This is not the forum to discuss the war, what Bush did or did not do and all that sort of stuff. However, I agree completely with Lumberton when he said
    There are about 95 senators and 520+ congresspersons in Washington DC that would be inclined to agree with you.  biggrin 

    IMO, this is simply about leverage in the WTO case.


It is payback time and I will guarantee you that any congressperson or senator who votes to give a contract to Airbus for the tanker fleet will be out of office in a week. Feelings are still running real deep and anyone who thinks Airbus has a snowball's chance is hell is just fooling themselves. Airbus should simply said, "sorry, not interested" and move on. However Leahy, who is American, is also stupid enough to try to force the issue, and so we have this counter. Airbus is actually in a lose--lose situation.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
keesje
Posts: 8863
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:02 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 17):
Unfortunately, it is a "what have you done for me (us) lately" situation....

Well I think this is a sensible business & the US industry hopes to continue selling billions of there products to Europe. Products like: JSF, C-17, Apache, 737EAW /MMA, Chinooks, F-22, JDAM, Patriots, SLAM, V22, Radar and Air Defense Systems, F16, F18, (Sea)Hawk´s, XM30, ATM/ATC systems, Paveway´s, Tomahawk´s, CH53´s, Aegis, Sidewinders and who knows what..

The relations between the KC-767 & governement support has been been proved. Senior people got fired / convicted for it. It makes sense for the people to also try at least try to do some leveling here, create a the others suck too kind of a balanced negotiation situation.

They know everybody is taking a close look this time, so they have to play it carefully.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:06 am

Quoting A319XFW (Reply 25):
I was reading this and it got me thinking - saying the U.S. shouldn't buy planes actively involved in a trade dispute would also mean Boeing's aircraft, as there is a WTO dispute about that, too. Or is he painting things with two brushes?

Well, I would point out that the A330 was subsidized directly using the justification that the US manufacturers received a subsidy through their military business. Of course that ignores that the most successful US civil aircraft manufacturer didn't have as much military business as the less successful US large civil aircraft manufacturers. My view is that military business can be a distraction and pulls of resources from commercial aircraft ventures that have a higher ROI. Certainly didn't help MD, despite MD having greater defense revenues.

Big version: Width: 719 Height: 533 File size: 66kb
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:12 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 30):
Well I think this is a sensible business & the US industry hopes to continue selling billions of there products to Europe. Products like: JSF, C-17, Apache, 737EAW /MMA, Chinooks, F-22, JDAM, Patriots, SLAM, V22, Radar and Air Defense Systems, F16, F18, (Sea)Hawk´s, XM30, ATM/ATC systems, Paveway´s, Tomahawk´s, CH53´s, Aegis, Sidewinders and who knows what..

EADS is not representative of all of Europe though. It's ownership is German, French, and Spanish, and I expect sales of US defense products to these militaries to be low in the long term, except for unique, high R&D products, and that actually depends on whether the US wants to risk the tech transfer issues.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:34 am

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 32):
EADS is not representative of all of Europe though.

Absolutely correct. I get the impression that some feel that EADS is somehow symbolic of the EU itself. This isn't personal folks (although Potin has expressed another view), it's strictly business--we just want to make sure this business stays mostly in the continental U.S.! We will continue to buy products from Alenia, Rolls Royce, MTU, SNECMA, no matter what happens. Remember, the software for the 787 management effort is--French!

Quoting Keesje (Reply 30):
The relations between the KC-767 & governement support has been been proved.

Well, I have to ask "so what"? You agreed with my comment that this is a "what have you done for me lately" situation, didn't you? All's forgiven now, and that's in the past. Oh, it'll show up in a news article from time to time,but don't think for a second that this will militate against Boeing in the tanker decision. No one, neither the Democrats or Republicans, are going to dwell on that. McCain had his 15 minutes of fame and if he wants to be president, he can't afford to piss off voters in Washington and Kansas!

[Edited 2006-04-30 01:36:51]

[Edited 2006-04-30 01:44:28]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:25 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 32):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 30):
Well I think this is a sensible business & the US industry hopes to continue selling billions of there products to Europe. Products like: JSF, C-17, Apache, 737EAW /MMA, Chinooks, F-22, JDAM, Patriots, SLAM, V22, Radar and Air Defense Systems, F16, F18, (Sea)Hawk´s, XM30, ATM/ATC systems, Paveway´s, Tomahawk´s, CH53´s, Aegis, Sidewinders and who knows what..

EADS is not representative of all of Europe though. It's ownership is German, French, and Spanish, and I expect sales of US defense products to these militaries to be low in the long term, except for unique, high R&D products, and that actually depends on whether the US wants to risk the tech transfer issues.

Which they no longer are willing to do. The American military is wary of exporting technology which might be sold on to obviously potential enemies. Israel for one sold on Patriot missile technology to China.

There is an old saying. "First time shame on you, second time shame on me."
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11007
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 12:45 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 8):
Last I looked, the UK selected the 330 tanker, and I'm not aware of any pending military purchases by Germany, France, or Spain that involve Boeing.

There are several EU, or individual country military contracts that POTENTIALLY could go to Boeing, or any other US manufactuer.

Quoting TropicBird (Reply 18):
I personally fail to see how a bidder(s) being subsidized on an aircraft (that is already in production) can have any direct bearing on this procurement

There is a thought that someone who subsidized development of a potential future military weapons system, could tell the new military service they cannot use their production of replacement parts and or the airplane it self, if that country does not agree with the operation about to begin.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 26):
Frankly, I think Airbus should simply no bid and save themselves the grief.

If EADS/Grumman can convince USAF they have the best solution, for the best price, for the new tanker, they should bid.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 27):
There are about 95 senators and 520+ congresspersons in Washington DC that would be inclined to agree with you.

There are 100 members of the Senate (2 from each state), and 435 members of the House, for a total membership in Congress of 535.

Quoting A342 (Reply 28):
I´m sorry, but the politicians in the government at that time in both Germany and France weren´t so extremely stupid like Bush.

The political leadership in Germany and France, at the time the US, UK, and 28 other Colilition countries went into Iraq, had their hands in Saddam's cookie jars, under the illusion of the UN oil for food program. President Bush just closed the cookie jar on them.

BTW, the 60 million Americans who reelected GW, do not agree with you.

But, it is the EU attitude like this that will keep the tanker deal from Airbus. The US will never give military operational veto power to the EU, UN or anyone else, even if it means buying more expensive tankers from Boeing.

Okay, okay, I'm off my soap box now, and A342, please don't take my remarks as personal. I just like a healthy debate (and cannot resist them), my friend.
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 3:40 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 35):
There are 100 members of the Senate (2 from each state), and 435 members of the House, for a total membership in Congress of 535.

Somehow I knew I wouldn't get away with that mistake!  Wink

Let's keep in mind that regardless of the outcome of the tanker purchase, the two-way flow in aerospace between the U.S. and western Europe is healthy, and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Regarding the WTO case, I suspect that most countries could give a rats @ss who's right--so long as they can play manufacturers off against each other and get the best deal. In fact, if you come right down to it, the most controversial issue in all of world trade, far eclipsing this issue in impact and global relevance, and the one that does the most harm, is agricultural subsidies. But...this discussion more properly belongs on Non-av.

Just a thought...what if this gambit gets the two sides talking and solves the WTO case? What if as a result of the settlement, the USAF gets some very excellent KC-30 tankers and a mix of Boeing tankers? I don't know what the trade-off would be, but to me that would be a most satisfactory outcome!  cloudnine 
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 4:45 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 35):
BTW, the 60 million Americans who reelected GW, do not agree with you.

This may be true, but I think I can safely say that most of the world´s population does agree with me.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 5:13 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 37):
This may be true, but I think I can safely say that most of the world�s population does agree with me.

Are they bidding on this too? Sorry, but if you note my previous post on the agricultural subsidies, I bet most of the world would agree that the EU is flat out wrong. I don't mean this as flamebait, but one's perspective is very much clouded by their particular values, which tend to shift as the subject changes. Best saved for Non-Av (which I personally avoid like the toxic toilet it is....)

[Edited 2006-04-30 22:15:40]

[Edited 2006-04-30 22:18:03]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
TropicBird
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:13 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 5:23 am

What is EADS going to do if the USAF wants a "large" aircraft variant...will the A340 compete favorably against the 777 or even 747 (the Rand study ruled out the A380)? Practically everyone seems so focused on the 767 & A330 but that may not happen especially if it helps Boeing to select from this category.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3882
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 6:25 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could ask a US court to rule that Airbus funding is not relevent to supply contracts and have the requirements removed from the RFP,

They could, but then that would not play very well to Airbus' advantage. Besides, funding is very relevant and material in a competitive bid if it gives one competitor an unfair advantage.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Its like an employer asking what underwear you wear, some questions just arent relevent to the position or contract sought.

See above. Funding in this process is very relevant.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Airbus could also create a wholey funded subsidiary company to respond to the RFP producing airframes under license or purchasing a set number of airframes, and thus dodge the entire issue.

You don't know much about U.S. government procurement policies or the F.A.R.'s (and that's NOT an acronym for Federal Aviation Regulations), do you?

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
There are plenty of ways around this politically based request.

Yes, there are. But there's only one way around it while remaining competitively viable and that is to provide the information requested.

Quoting A319XFW (Reply 25):
France is looking to replace their KC-135 (or whatever they call them) soon with new tankers.

Somehow I don't think anyone is worried about France not buying American produced military hardware. It's kind of like looking up at the sun and worrying that it may suddenly extinguish itself.
My other home is in the sky inside my Piper Cherokee 180.
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 6:57 am

Quoting Oryx (Reply 16):
Quoting Wingman (Reply 12):
none of these three countries has ever procured such a massive military system (as a % of total annual defense expenditure) from the US.



Germany: Lokheed F104G, McDonnell Douglas F-4F Phantom II, Bell UH-1D, Patriot - all big items for our small defence budget.

OK lately most shopping is done at EADS but for the last 50 years Germany bought a lot of equipement in the USA.

True,
Germany bought a great deal from the US . However , who was in Europe spending "billions" of dollars $$$ protecting Europe from the "REDS" for those 50 years ???

Answer = USA !

Halibut
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
Contact_tower
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:05 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 9:10 am

Quote:
However , who was in Europe spending "billions" of dollars $$$ protecting Europe from the "REDS" for those 50 years ???

Answer = USA !

Halibut

And I think most europeans are greatful for that......but, it's not like it was for our benefit only.......
A continent in ruins makes for a bad trade partner, more so if it turns "red"!  Big grin
 
Oryx
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:25 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 7:41 pm

Quoting Halibut (Reply 41):
Germany bought a great deal from the US . However , who was in Europe spending "billions" of dollars $$$ protecting Europe from the "REDS" for those 50 years ???

Actually we were (are still?) paying for (a part of) the rendered services.
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 8:14 pm

Quoting Contact_tower (Reply 42):
And I think most europeans are greatful for that......but, it's not like it was for our benefit only.......
A continent in ruins makes for a bad trade partner, more so if it turns "red"!

Apperently you don't appear to be one of those grateful Europeans , by judging from your comment above . You attempt to spin it , to make it look as though the US intentions were greed based .

The US saw the "REDS" for what they were " ruthless ,murdering commi's " . IF the REDS were not held in check in Europe by the US , they would have done what they did in Afghanistan - Kill millions of people strickly to strenthen an evil empire !

I like how you criticsize the US's intentions for protecting an entire continent , yet say nothing regarding the "REDS" , whose intentions were obvious & genocidial !

Nice try my Norwegian brother !  sarcastic 

Halibut

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Afghanistan

Just over 15,000 Soviet troops were killed from 1979 through 1989, in addition to many hundreds of vehicles and aircraft destroyed/shot down. An estimated one million Afghans died as a result of the invasion during this period.
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
keesje
Posts: 8863
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 9:41 pm

I still think still the fundamental problem in the US Tanker competition is:

the best aircraft to meet the specs comes from the wrong side of the ocean

IMO much of all the controversy can be brought back to this big issue, despite all the alternatives, broading of the discussion, history, subsidies, politics, US jobs, loyalty, etc. etc. brought in to mistify the fact..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 10:04 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 45):
still think still the fundamental problem in the US Tanker competition is:
the best aircraft to meet the specs comes from the wrong side of the ocean

You may be correct, but unless one has extreme tunnel vision, the issues have expanded far beyond a mere tanker procurement.   Besides, it would not be the first time that a particular country has favored it's indigenous product over a foreign competitors. To suggest that the U.S. alone is guilty of hypocricy would be extremely disingenuous. Besides, who said that the 100% solution is required, if a 90% solution will work?

I predict that EADS, the EU, and the US will somehow manage to reach an accord before a very damaging WTO case is put in the hands of a few "faceless bureaucrats". If not, this could wreck the whole system--regardless of the outcome. If my prediction comes about, it may be in no small part as a result of this (IMO) bold and daring gambit!

[Edited 2006-05-01 15:13:53]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Longbow
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 1:07 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 10:25 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 45):
the best aircraft to meet the specs comes from the wrong side of the ocean

Hmmmm.....not sure the USAF knows what their requirements for the new tanker are yet, let alone any of us. I don't think this is a fair statement.

And I second Oroka's notion way back at the beginning of this thread...

Quoting Oroka (Reply 13):
GO KC-787!
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Mon May 01, 2006 10:58 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 45):
I still think still the fundamental problem in the US Tanker competition is:

the best aircraft to meet the specs comes from the wrong side of the ocean

Tell me more about that.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13988
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

USAF Seeks Info On Subsidies From Tanker Bidders

Tue May 02, 2006 12:43 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 45):
the best aircraft to meet the specs comes from the wrong side of the ocean

And the best engine for the A400M came from Canada, but that didn't stop Airbus Military from going with "home cooking".

Let's face it: Most of Europe will buy European except in special cases where it's just too darn expensive to do otherwise, and America will buy American except in special cases.

I'd be shocked to see the US buy a multi-billion dollar fleet of tankers from EU, just like I'd be shocked to see a EU country buy a new build multi billion euro aircraft carrier from the US.

Yes, I know in decades past the EU pumped billions of dollars into the F-16, F-4, F-104, etc but I think those days are past. EU will go with Eurofighter et al unless it's just too darn expensive to do otherwise. I think the UK will be the only EU country to buy F-35, and there's even some doubt around that these days.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests