|Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 3):|
Also the reason that Pemco underbids they do crappy work and give back a piece of crap that has to be repaired at the field level.
Pemco does do shitty work, and has (all the prediseccors of Pemco) for the last 40 years on KC
-135, C-130, P-3, and C-131/T-29 work. Even the paint peels off the first time you fly through a rain storm.
There is a reason this company changes its name every few years. Now it is AAII, changing the name even after they filed the protest with that joke of a government agency, the GAO.
Now, the USAF
is going to have to make a choice, give some KC
-135s due PDM (equil to cilivan "D" checks) a waiver to fly 10% over the hours they are due, or begin grounding KC
-135s. Either way, it is a loose/loose for the AF
. It can be dangerous to the crews to over fly scheduled maintenance, or you give up on missions to be flown because there is no tanker support. I cannot think of any airplane that would have more effect on the missions flown by the USAF
than the KC
-135. Almost every mission needs a tanker.
This is in AAII's own protest press release:
AAII / PEMCO AVIATION GROUP, INC. ANNOUNCES FILING OF
(September 21, 2007) – Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc. d/b/a Pemco Aviation Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: PAGI) announced today that its Birmingham, Alabama military division, Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc. – Birmingham d/b/a Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., filed a bid protest at the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) on September 19, 2007. The protest challenges the actions of the U.S. Air Force in awarding a contract to Boeing Aerospace Operations (Boeing) to provide Programmed Depot Maintenance (PDM) for KC
-135 aircraft. Pemco believes that the award to Boeing violated both applicable law and the rules that the Air Force had established for the competition. Through its bid protest, Pemco is asking that the Air Force terminate the award to Boeing and redirect the award to Pemco.
Ron Aramini, President and Chief Executive Officer stated, “After receiving the government’s debrief and looking at all the available data, we feel strongly that the contract should have been awarded to Pemco. This is a very serious matter and we are going to fight to ensure all evidence is fully and fairly evaluated.”
What they are really saying, is the USAF
gave away a contract that is rightfully ours, so give it back to us.