• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
 
FCKC
Topic Author
Posts: 1630
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 9:39 pm

A or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:28 pm

http://www.lesechos.fr:80/info/aero/300307080.htm

Les Echos report USAF will give their choice between Airbus and Boeing for tankers in March 2010.

Thus Boeing will have time to propose another programm (KC777 ? ) than the KC767.

Hope this time will be the good one !
 
kaitak
Posts: 8935
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

A or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:40 pm

Don't forget also that there will probably be further delays, then appeals, to the extent that the final decision will be made during the run up to the next US presidential election.

I still think Boeing should be looking at the 787 and another production line.

The problem is, of course, that if the US rejects the A330, it could pose problems for the F-35's sales prospects in Europe; "you scratch my back ..."
 
A10WARTHOG
Posts: 200
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 7:32 am

A or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:46 pm

The next big question, will there be funds to even buy the new aircraft.
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

A or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:46 pm



Quoting FCKC (Thread starter):
Les Echos report USAF will give their choice between Airbus and Boeing for tankers in March 2010

I regret that I don't speak or read French. Why is there a delay until 2010?
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

A or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:16 pm

Somehow I doubt if a French news organization will be one to break news on a US military procrument issue.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:35 am



Quoting KC" class=quote target=_blank>FCKC (Thread starter):
Les Echos report USAF will give their choice between Airbus and Boeing for tankers in March 2010.

Thus Boeing will have time to propose another programm (KC777 ? ) than the KC767.

Hope this time will be the good one !

Everyday, I hold less hope for a new build tanker. But, I would guess that both Boeing and EADS/NG will offer several different airframes for the new tankers.

EADS;
A-330-200 MRTT (KC-30A/B)
A-330-200F
A-340-500
A-380-800F
A-319LR/A-320E

Boeing;
B-767-200LRF (KC-767AT)
B-767-200ER (KC-767A/J)
B-767-300ERF
B-767-400ER
B-777-200LRF
B-747-8F
B-737-700BBJ/ER/IGW (C-40B/C)

Quoting A10WARTHOG (Reply 2):
The next big question, will there be funds to even buy the new aircraft.

No.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:02 pm

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
The problem is, of course, that if the US rejects the A330, it could pose problems for the F-35's sales prospects in Europe; "you scratch my back ..."

When did the French, Germans, and Spainish say they were interested in the F-35?

IMO, it will have zero effect. The UK is committed to the program, if only for the naval version. Would the Netherlands, Norway, & Denmark pull out to express "solidarity" with the airbus countries and opt out of the production sharing/offsets? Frankly, I see these programs as two entirely different issues.

[Edited 2008-11-08 04:06:25]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4296
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:39 pm



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
The problem is, of course, that if the US rejects the A330, it could pose problems for the F-35's sales prospects in Europe; "you scratch my back ..."

As Lumberton correctly pointed out, neither Germany, France or Spain ever was willing to buy the JSF, and the UK is too deeply involved into hte programme.

However, it would have a negative effect in the overall approach to competition, as the EU itself will not be willing to be very cooperative in the dispute on subsidies for Airbus, if they see that a european product virtually has no chance on the US defense sector due to political reasons.

But this is not a direct impact, which would be zero.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:59 am



Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 7):
However, it would have a negative effect in the overall approach to competition, as the EU itself will not be willing to be very cooperative in the dispute on subsidies for Airbus, if they see that a european product virtually has no chance on the US defense sector due to political reasons.

EADS/Airbus already sells to the US Military, and several airlines in the US. The US is the second biggest market for Airbus, behind the Middle east.
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:08 pm



Quoting FCKC (Thread starter):
Thus Boeing will have time to propose another programm (KC777 ? ) than the KC767.

Has the Air Force revised its requirements so that this is an all new competition?
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
LMP737
Posts: 4800
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:05 pm



Quoting A10WARTHOG (Reply 2):
The next big question, will there be funds to even buy the new aircraft.

That's the billion dollar question.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:47 pm



Quoting FCKC (Thread starter):
Hope this time will be the good one !

Depeds if it the good one.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
EADS/Airbus already sells to the US Military, and several airlines in the US. The US is the second biggest market for Airbus, behind the Middle east.

Bigger then Europe & Asia?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13757
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:05 am



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 9):
Has the Air Force revised its requirements so that this is an all new competition?

The last competition was "cancelled". We have no idea if/when there will be another conpetition, and neither does Les Echoes. When/if there is a new competition, it can be based on the same requirements, or all new ones, or some combination thereof.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:44 am



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 9):
Has the Air Force revised its requirements so that this is an all new competition?

Well, it looks like they have 16 months to complete any revision.

Quoting LMP737 (Reply 10):
That's the billion dollar question.

More like the $40B question.
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:59 am

I wonder if EADS will strike a deal with GE to put the GENX under the A330 tanker, cargo and maybe passenger versions.

It would improve payload-range by 20% and make it environmetal / PR future prove..

Maybe the french air force can be launch customer.

"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:06 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 14):
I wonder if EADS will strike a deal with GE to put the GENX under the A330 tanker, cargo and maybe passenger versions.

It would improve payload-range by 20% and make it environmetal / PR future prove..

Maybe the french air force can be launch customer.

They could do that. But, will GE allow it? GE may have an exclusive contract for the GEnx with Boeing.

I have not heard when the French Air Force will start the program to replace their 11 KC-135FRs. Do you have any info that can be put on the a.net?
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:46 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 15):
They could do that. But, will GE allow it? GE may have an exclusive contract for the GEnx with Boeing.

The Genx was tuned for the original A350, GE talked to various parties about the option. Now the 787 & 747-8i are delayed, GE might be willing to reduce their damage of those delays..

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...genx-offered-for-future-a330s.html

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 15):
have not heard when the French Air Force will start the program to replace their 11 KC-135FRs. Do you have any info that can be put on the a.net?

Their AF commander openly asked for speeding up the replacement schedule recently (can't find the link). More importantly the French (& Sarkozy seems no exeception) believe strongly in government intervention to serve national interest, far more then Western European countries.

Government and industry are close (mngt comes from the same schools & switched easily between them). Industries are nationalized / laws adjusted in the name of the greater French interest. The population fully supports and even demands this from their government (strong unions)..

It frustrates many open market parties in Europe (E.g. the French companies take over good european competitors, backed by their government, but that government stops others taking over good french companies..).

Ordering tanker replacements / improvements now, would fit perfectly in their industrial strategy.. & by doing so they claim more influence in Airbus.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Ken777
Posts: 9022
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:26 am

I believe that money is going to be too tight for the AF to consider a new tanker by either company.

Best to take any funds available and upgrade KC-135's while they can. When the economy improves and other non-military programs are going smoothly then maybe there is a chance.

But first I believe that there will need to be repayments of loans by the financial institutions (and, soon, the Big 3 automakers) before a lot of politicians will be willing to look at anything like a tanker.

By the time the dust settles we might be looking at a 787/350 battle for the contract.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:58 am



Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):

By the time the dust settles we might be looking at a 787/350 battle for the contract.

 checkmark 

This is done for now with the economy imploding like it has in the US. We're talking trillions of dollars of bailouts when it's all said and done. That means game over.  checkeredflag 
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:54 pm



Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):

Agree.

With the possible exception of the F-35, all that is going to happen over the next 10 years or so is old spent airplanes are going to be removed from service thus reducing the overall refuleing requirements which will produce a natural drawdown of the -135's.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9022
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:38 pm



Quoting Gsosbee (Reply 19):
all that is going to happen over the next 10 years or so is old spent airplanes are going to be removed from service thus reducing the overall refuleing requirements which will produce a natural drawdown of the -135's.

I'm not sure that Obama will go for shrinking the military during his first 4 years. It might be the opposite, simply because we've learned a painful lesson in Iraq with extended deployments and too little time at home between deployments. We've learned about forced extension of active duty time (a draft at the end of an enlistment?) and have seen record number of Majors leaving the service.

All of this was due to undermanning of the services and Obama is smart enough to understand that is a problem that needs to be resolved. There are also people like Colin Powell who has his ear and respect.

The need to rebuild after Iraq, enlarge active duty forces, etc. is the main reason why I believe programs like the tanker will best be funded with up-grading instead of new planes. "Up-grades" that support jobs in the US also have a better chance of being funded.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3784
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:33 pm



Quoting Keesje (Reply 14):
I wonder if EADS will strike a deal with GE to put the GENX under the A330 tanker, cargo and maybe passenger versions.

It would improve payload-range by 20% and make it environmetal / PR future prove..

Maybe the french air force can be launch customer.

That could very well be the winning option? It sounds very good to me.
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:19 pm



Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):

I hope you are right, but history and current economic issues say no way.
 
fsnuffer
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:38 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:18 am

Obama has expressed support for rapid, globally deployable power, which equates to additional airlift (C-17) and refueling tankers (KC-X) to support it. He has also said that we need to look at cutting programs designed to meet Cold War requirements (F-22)
 
arluna
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:59 am



Quoting Fsnuffer (Reply 23):
Obama has expressed support for rapid, globally deployable power, which equates to additional airlift (C-17) and refueling tankers (KC-X) to support it. He has also said that we need to look at cutting programs designed to meet Cold War requirements (F-22)

Fsnuffer,

I beleive he said that during the campagin so it really doesn't mean anything. You know that candidates will say what ever they feel they need to say in order to get votes. He has no regard for the military and will not fund any programs as costly as KC-X.

J
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:19 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 16):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 15):
They could do that. But, will GE allow it? GE may have an exclusive contract for the GEnx with Boeing.

The Genx was tuned for the original A350, GE talked to various parties about the option. Now the 787 & 747-8i are delayed, GE might be willing to reduce their damage of those delays..

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html



Quoting EPA001 (Reply 21):
That could very well be the winning option? It sounds very good to me.

Keesje, that artical is well over two years old. Even if EADS offered a GEnx equipped A-330-200F beginning today, both the B-787-8 and B-747-8F/I will have completed all flight testing and be in airline service before the engineering design work is completed. The delays in the B-787 and B-747 projects in no way are thefault of GE, or RR.

There still is a chance GE could have an exclusive contract for GEnx only to Boeing.

Quoting Fsnuffer (Reply 23):
Obama has expressed support for rapid, globally deployable power, which equates to additional airlift (C-17) and refueling tankers (KC-X) to support it. He has also said that we need to look at cutting programs designed to meet Cold War requirements (F-22)

If that is true, then the cheapest way is still upgrading the KC-135Es and buying more C-17As. as for the F-22A, it really isn't a cold war weapons system. It is still a F-15 replacement, and an air superiority fighter.

Quoting Arluna (Reply 24):
He has no regard for the military and will not fund any programs as costly as KC-X.

Correct.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:40 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 25):

If that is true, then the cheapest way is still upgrading the KC-135Es and buying more C-17As.

Which frankly I don't see as a horrible option FWIW
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 6:37 pm



Quoting Fsnuffer (Reply 23):
Obama has expressed support for rapid, globally deployable power, which equates to additional airlift (C-17) and refueling tankers (KC-X) to support it. He has also said that we need to look at cutting programs designed to meet Cold War requirements (F-22)

All said in the heat of a Presidential election to buy votes. Votes have now been counted and reality is setting in.
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:52 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 25):

There still is a chance GE could have an exclusive contract for GEnx only to Boeing.

GE is still offering the GENX for the A350XWB but Airbus wants a bigger engine.
http://www.domain-b.com/aero/aero_mfg/20080519_airbus.html

Given RR offers the launch engine for the Boeing 787, sole engine for the A350XWB and leads on the A380 and A330, I can imagine GE is looking for some fresh opportunities.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
dl767captain
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:51 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:33 pm

I'm confused but why doesnt the AF just order both the A330 and 767 tanker? I know Boeing and Airbus are trying to put them on the same mission but honestly they seem like they are both good for different operations. So instead of A and B bickering over who should get the order just put in a split order and stop worrying about it.

Then later on boeing can offer a 777 tanker to replace the DC-10 tankers and Airbus can try and offer an A340 tanker or something
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:04 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 28):
GE is still offering the GENX for the A350XWB but Airbus wants a bigger engine.
http://www.domain-b.com/aero/aero_mf....html

Again, this is old news, from May, 2008. But, the artical says nothing about GE offering the GEnx, or a varient of it, to Airbus. The story says nothing of an offer for the A-330 airplane, this artical is only about the A-350XWB. It says Airbus is waiting for GE to design and offer an engine that meets Airbus's requirements (for the A-350).

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 29):
I'm confused but why doesnt the AF just order both the A330 and 767 tanker?

Cost would be the major reason, as well as training requirements/costs and maintenance/logistics costs.

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 29):
Then later on boeing can offer a 777 tanker to replace the DC-10 tankers and Airbus can try and offer an A340 tanker or something

While a KC-777 (if the B-777 is still in production when the KC-Y programs begins) could be a KC-10 replacement, there is no way any current model of the A-340, in a KC-340 version can do that. A KC-340 would simply be a slightly heavier and four engine version of any KC-30 offer.
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:46 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 30):
It says Airbus is waiting for GE to design and offer an engine that meets Airbus's requirements (for the A-350).

Still its ordered, outselling the 777. Exclusively with RR. Not a winning horse for GE.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 25):
There still is a chance GE could have an exclusive contract for GEnx only to Boeing.

Do you have any source / info on that?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:00 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 31):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 25):
There still is a chance GE could have an exclusive contract for GEnx only to Boeing.

Do you have any source / info on that?

Just speculating, there must be another reason why GE doesn't seem to respond to the Airbus request, based on this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350#Engines

But on June 2007, Rolls-Royce announced that it had signed its biggest ever contract with Qatar Airways for the Trent XWB to power 80 A350 XWBs on order from Airbus worth $5.6 billion at list prices and in June 2007, Airbus' Chief Operating Officer John Leahy indicated that the A350 XWB will not feature the GEnx engine, claiming that Airbus wants GE to offer a more efficient version for the new Airbus airliner. Since then, largest GE engines operators Emirates, US-based US Airways, Hawaiian Airlines and ILFC have selected the RR Trent XWB for their future fleet of A350.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 31):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 30):
It says Airbus is waiting for GE to design and offer an engine that meets Airbus's requirements (for the A-350).

Still its ordered, outselling the 777. Exclusively with RR. Not a winning horse for GE.

Hmmm, where did you get that? As of October 2008, the B-777 has 1096 orders, including 73 orders for the "F" model, and it has engine choices from GE, P&W, and RR. OTOH, the A-350 has a total of 468 firm orders, as of 7 November 2008 all with RR engines (although the GP-7000 engine may be offered later).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350

Maybe you were thinking it is the A-330 that has out sold the B-777? Oops, that is wrong, too. As of August 2008, Airbus has had firm orders of 1006, of course that does not count the canceled USAF order of 69 KC-45As (out of a total 179 KC-45s that could have been ordered), but it does include the 66 A-330-200F orders.

Of course the A-330 is older than the B-777. The B-777 (then called both the B-7N7 or the B-767X) was launched in 1988, while the A-330/-340 was launched in 1987.

But, here are some interesting charts, that show both Boeing and Airbus airplanes are not really that much different from each other, other than price. Of course this data will change almost daily.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_between_Airbus_and_Boeing
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:52 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 30):
GE offering the GEnx, or a varient of it, to Airbus. The story says nothing of an offer for the A-330 airplane

GE pushed the GEnx REAL hard at the A330/330F. It was Airbus who turned it down based on the excessive work it demanded to the wing.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 32):
Just speculating, there must be another reason why GE doesn't seem to respond to the Airbus request

Like Airbus royally screwed them over when they migrated from the old A350 to the A350XWB.
GE had lead position on the A350.
Then Airbus told them bluntly that the GEnx "wasn't good enough" for the A350XWB

Rgds
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:13 am



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 33):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 30):
GE offering the GEnx, or a varient of it, to Airbus. The story says nothing of an offer for the A-330 airplane

GE pushed the GEnx REAL hard at the A330/330F. It was Airbus who turned it down based on the excessive work it demanded to the wing.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 32):
Just speculating, there must be another reason why GE doesn't seem to respond to the Airbus request

Like Airbus royally screwed them over when they migrated from the old A350 to the A350XWB.
GE had lead position on the A350.
Then Airbus told them bluntly that the GEnx "wasn't good enough" for the A350XWB

Rgds

Correct, that is why I think GE has walked away from Airbus, for now, and to Boeing.
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:32 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 34):
Correct, that is why I think GE has walked away from Airbus, for now, and to Boeing.

Well GE stills provide raw numbers of engines to Airbus, CF6-80E1, CFM56-5, GP7000.

I think both GE and airbus are scratching thier heads.

It seems GE was ready to deliver the GENX for the 787 and 747-8 & now probably halted production after producing xx shipsets.

Airbus is still lacking the GE engines some key customers prefer for new A350XWBs while Boeing offers dual choice on 787 and 777..

a loose-loose situation it seems ..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:22 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
Airbus is still lacking the GE engines some key customers prefer for new A350XWBs while Boeing offers dual choice on 787 and 777..

Since all models of the B-777 are still offered, from the B-77A to the B-77W, there are all trhee major engine manufacturers offered, P&W, GE, and RR.
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1760
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:53 pm



Quoting A10WARTHOG (Reply 2):
The next big question, will there be funds to even buy the new aircraft.

Doubt it...for political reasons.
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:15 pm

NG is starting to stir the pot:

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/index.xml

Looks like no quarter to be given which raises the question: When Boeing is chosen this time, will NG protest?
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 22, 2008 12:19 am

Quoting Gsosbee (Reply 38):
NG is starting to stir the pot:

NG is desperate methinks. They will have less supporters in the next Congress than they do in the current Congress, and we saw how much support they garnered with their "America's New Tanker" campaign there. Perhaps more importantly (and even more discouraging for NG) they won't have the Bush Administration, but a real-honest-to-goodness populist, union supporting Administration to deal with as well. As for John Young taking exception, he'll be a non-entity WRT the tanker procurement in two months.

Let them "stir the pot".

By the way, NG should really be concerned about comments like this.

Quote:
“If I was a Boeing executive, I’d look at the state of Alabama and see there’s a qualified work force ... I’d take a look at the assets we have,” said Stephen Nodine, president of the Mobile County Commission, whose offices are in Mobile, Ala.

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2008/11/17/daily99.html

[Edited 2008-11-21 16:35:28]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6663
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 22, 2008 12:57 pm

How about this slant on things.
1. The EU and other nations in general blame the US mortgage crisis for their current financial issues, I'm somewhat sceptical but how that caused the collapse of Iceland banking and the UK involvement but I'm no financial expert, I need education on that.

2. The US needs to right its economy and all will once again be well in the world, however, the worlds views and the US view are two different things with the change in administration. The Bush administration is in sync with the rest of the world, have US consumers continue to buy foreign goods driving up the US deficit, lowering the value of the dollar to offest the disadvantage, lowering thr savings rate of Americans even lower. The new administration is more about US industrial capacity, more jobs for Americans, less out-sourcing etc.

If my ramblings hold anything other than rum, I would not be surprized to see a re-work of the original tanker contract which sparked the whole mess, a single source contract given to Boeing at a fixed price for a limited number of tankers - 100 or so - with a memorandum of understanding that in 2 or 3 years a review will be done for a larger fleet replacement. All the Air Force personel will be out in force once again talking about how the KC-135's are due to fall out of the sky, the congress will be talking about the injection of capital into the northwest economy, the administration will talk about killing two birds with one stone, aid the economy and aid the military, the Europeans will be reminded of how much business the US already does with Airbus etc., I don't believe this administration will be throwing a fig leaf over the pond, especially when the next POTUS will be the first to fly around in a Eurpoean Marine One Helicopter, they will make a big fanfare of that when the tanker announcement is made, praising the Europeans for providing such a magnificent a/c, the US helicopter industry won't protest because they will see this and the Lakota as the last major projects to go across the pond under this current congress.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 22, 2008 1:53 pm



Quoting Par13del (Reply 40):
I would not be surprized to see a re-work of the original tanker contract which sparked the whole mess, a single source contract given to Boeing at a fixed price for a limited number of tankers - 100 or so - with a memorandum of understanding that in 2 or 3 years a review will be done for a larger fleet replacement.

 checkmark  If a new tanker happens at all, I agree, this is the most realistic scenario given the compositon of the new Congress and the leanings of the new Administration.

Boeing will just have to forego any hopes of selling the KC-767 to France.  duck 
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Acheron
Posts: 1827
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:41 pm



Quoting Lumberton (Reply 41):
Boeing will just have to forego any hopes of selling the KC-767 to France.

Maybe they can resort to bribery like Lockheed did with the F-104 and that some members conveniently forget whenever they say the USAF's next tanker should be american because "europe never buys anything american for their armed forces"
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:53 pm

Meanwhile, the Airbus CEO said he was "rather confident" that the European aircraft manufacturer can win the U.S. military's KC-X aerial tanker competition, again. "We won the tanker competition once, we're looking to win it a second time," he told reporters at the Paris dinner.

"We'll be looking hard to convince the U.S. Air Force that we have the best aircraft for the second time," he said, adding that "I'm rather confident as long as we get an RFP [request for proposal] that is fair."

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...Frustrated%20Over%20A400M%20Delays
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
dvautier
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:28 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:22 am

I have always strongly felt that the Air Force could get by with tanker upgrades. Now that Airbus has staunchly proclaimed that they will continue to receive subsidies, it is virtually impossible for Airbus to win any tanker contract.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1227...3761043.html?mod=yahoo_hs&ru=yahoo

The new Congress will never let it happen. The air force has to see that this is a political fact. It represents a clear loss of American jobs. That’s the reality. It has nothing to do with mission, specifications or requirements.
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:28 am



Quoting Dvautier (Reply 45):
The air force has to see that this is a political fact. It represents a clear loss of American jobs. That’s the reality. It has nothing to do with mission, specifications or requirements.

Then why should Europe continue to buy JSF, C130, C17, Apaches, Chinooks, missiles, etc, etc ?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:46 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 46):
Then why should Europe continue to buy JSF, C130, C17, Apaches, Chinooks, missiles, etc, etc ?

"Europe" or France, Germany, Spain and the UK? The countries buying JSF, and in particular the UK, have a significant production share I believe. WRT C-130s and C-17s, what's the alternative? Russian aircraft? The A400 might work out; then again, it might not.

Quoting Dvautier (Reply 45):
I have always strongly felt that the Air Force could get by with tanker upgrades. Now that Airbus has staunchly proclaimed that they will continue to receive subsidies, it is virtually impossible for Airbus to win any tanker contract.

Perhaps the Obamaites will axe the WTO complaint and pump billions into our aircraft industry too? After all, the government has now taken a stake in banks and insurance; autos will likely follow. Why not commercial aviation?

Let's both subsidize the world's airlines. We'll make it up on volume and selling spare parts.
 Big grin
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
keesje
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:04 am



Quoting Lumberton (Reply 47):
Perhaps the Obamaites will axe the WTO complaint and pump billions into our aircraft industry too?

Who says they haven't already?  Big grin

http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Concept2Reality/graphics/fig064.jpg

NASA Langley testing a composites wing 2000
http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Concept2Reality/composites.html

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 47):
WRT C-130s and C-17s, what's the alternative?

The air forces have to see that this is a political fact. It represents a clear loss of European jobs. That’s the reality. It has nothing to do with mission, specifications or requirements.
 Wink
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Thu Nov 27, 2008 10:35 am



Quoting Keesje (Reply 44):
Meanwhile, the Airbus CEO said he was "rather confident" that the European aircraft manufacturer can win the U.S. military's KC-X aerial tanker competition, again. "We won the tanker competition once, we're looking to win it a second time," he told reporters at the Paris dinner.

"We'll be looking hard to convince the U.S. Air Force that we have the best aircraft for the second time," he said, adding that "I'm rather confident as long as we get an RFP [request for proposal] that is fair."

Somehow, Keesje, I think Boeing would say something similar.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 46):
Quoting Dvautier (Reply 45):
The air force has to see that this is a political fact. It represents a clear loss of American jobs. That’s the reality. It has nothing to do with mission, specifications or requirements.

Then why should Europe continue to buy JSF, C130, C17, Apaches, Chinooks, missiles, etc, etc ?

Because Europe needs them, and the EU is not producing anything like them, including the, yet to fly, engineering retirement project called the A-400M. As it looks now, not only will the B-787 (in developement since 2004) and the B-747-8 (in developement since 2006) will both beat the A-400M (in developement since 1990) into the air. The B-777-200LRF (in developement since 2005) already has beaten the A-400M.

BTW, Keesje, did you know that the Norway has already taken delivery of their first C-130J (order placed in 2007), and NATO will have delivery of all 3 C-17As (order placed in 2008) long before the French AF gets their first A-400M?

Quoting Keesje (Reply 48):
NASA Langley testing a composites wing 2000
http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Concep....html

It seems EADS as well as Boeing has benefited from this type of research, or have you forgotten about the A-350 Mk. I, Mk. II, Mk. III, Mk. IV, Mk. V, and Mk. VI?
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: A Or B : Usaf Tanker Decision In March 2010

Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:58 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 49):
BTW, Keesje, did you know that the Norway has already taken delivery of their first C-130J (order placed in 2007), and NATO will have delivery of all 3 C-17As (order placed in 2008) long before the French AF gets their first A-400M?

Do remind us of the flawless and timely development and introduction history of the C-130Js.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ramair and 16 guests