User avatar
eksath
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 1301
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:19 am

"By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:56 pm

EADS North America claims on their website the following statement about the proposed assembled in US A330 civilian and miltary aircrafts:

http://www.kc45now.com/american-made/built-here.asp

"Our state-of-the-art tanker aircraft will be built in Mobile, Alabama, at the country’s newest aviation production center, where we also will produce a commercial freighter based on the same platform, for a combined production of as many as 40 aircraft annually."

From my understanding should this not be :

" By Europeans,Assembled by Americans"

 

Please correct me if I got it wrong.

[Edited 2010-06-10 10:57:13]
World Wide Aerospace Photography
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23097
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:03 pm

There are a number of US-based suppliers who produce parts for the A330 family (as well as all of the other Airbus Commercial and Military families of aircraft).
 
avalon2862
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:36 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:04 pm

"By Americans, For Americans" means "BUILT by Americans, For Americans"... Europe doesn't enter into that equation - except for production of parts (just like Boeing will get parts from "around the world" if they win the tanker war)
 
delimit
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:08 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:06 pm

Have you seen Boeing's rhetoric? And honestly, who cares? Aren't we supposed to be a capitalist society?

Perhaps this would be better in the Military Forum however?
 
Buddys747
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:33 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:28 pm

More interesting would be is the Mobile plant union? Being a right to work state and if they were non-union would mean to me lower paying jobs would prevail over higher paying ones.
 
delimit
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:08 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:34 pm

Perfect. This thread has amazing possibilities. Not only can we have an A vs. B argument and a free trade vs. protectionism argument, but a union vs. non-union argument as well.

This thread will be epic.
 
User avatar
eksath
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 1301
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:19 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:42 pm

Quoting avalon2862 (Reply 2):
By Americans, For Americans" means "BUILT by Americans, For Americans"...

As long as 51% of the components are American MADE, then the claim seems valid. But otherwise it is still not really American built.

I do recognized that there are many part suppliers around the world and that is great. However, the issue arises when someone tries to slip a product as something it is not. I think the Boeing aircraft should be examined too. This is not a A vsd B arguement but a truth in advertising and marketing issue PERIOD.
World Wide Aerospace Photography
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:49 pm

Built in America is a good marketing campaign, but designed in America is a big factor as well. Design work is where technology is and in my opinion is more valuable than manufacturing. Those are high paying specialty jobs. Even though tankers are to be built on existing platforms, there is significant design work involved.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:49 pm

Boeing's 787 Dreamliner is an American assembled aircraft with a lot foreign made parts.
Made the USA is not what it used to be.   
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:55 pm

Quoting eksath (Thread starter):
"By Europeans,Assembled by Americans"

What a terrific slogan that would be for EADS. You should work in their marketing department.  
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:02 pm

Quoting Delimit (Reply 3):
Have you seen Boeing's rhetoric? And honestly, who cares? Aren't we supposed to be a capitalist society?

Perhaps this would be better in the Military Forum however?

True, but when you can produce your own military aircraft etc. and a high end technology, its better to keep that in country for what its worth. Just like you wouldn't want to give F-22 technology for Iran to build etc.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 8):
Boeing's 787 Dreamliner is an American assembled aircraft with a lot foreign made parts.
Made the USA is not what it used to be.

A lot of that went back to Boeing after all the problems they had.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2166
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:26 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 7):
but designed in America is a big factor as well.



I've seen those "Design in USA/Made in China" bicycles or "Assembled in USA of Foreign Components" labels. Just makes me laugh. Who's to say USA design is better than anyone else.

Just take Apple for example. Does anyone knows if Apple makes anything in the US? But regular guys and gals out there would swear that Apple is an American (US) company.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 8):
Boeing's 787 Dreamliner is an American assembled aircraft with a lot foreign made parts.



By weight or part count?   

But seriously, if you take a hunk of aluminum, or the raw material for a composite frame and trace it through the whole fabrication process, you'll be surprise on where it starts and the route it takes to get to the final delivered aircraft.

It's just easier wrap your head around the "where it's assembled" concept.

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
blueflyer
Posts: 3633
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:35 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 7):
Built in America is a good marketing campaign, but designed in America is a big factor as well.

"By Americans For Americans" is a perfect motto. It doesn't say what is "by Americans," it just implies that the plane is, giving patriotic cover to local and state politicians lobbying for it, and I don't believe that Boeing will try very hard to discredit this claim, not only because it is vague enough that it's actually hard to discredit, but because Boeing does have foreign suppliers as well and while it would win any comparison with Airbus over country-of-origin, it may not want to dispel in the process the public's erroneous notion that Boeing is 100% American.

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 10):
A lot of that went back to Boeing after all the problems they had.

If you believe that Boeing will hesitate one second to send work and parts to foreign countries again if they think they have resolved the issues that plagued them with the 787, I have a famous French-made statue in New York for sale you might be interested in...

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 10):
True, but when you can produce your own military aircraft etc. and a high end technology, its better to keep that in country for what its worth.

Two issues with that argument:
#1 What do you do when a foreign supplier manufactures parts/equipment that are clearly superior to anything that is produced domestically?
#2 Generally speaking (and you may be the exception), this kind of noble argument tends to disappear when a US manufacturer finds obstacles in its attempt to sell to foreign countries...
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has no clothes.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:38 pm

So Europe which supports unions, generous social benefits, the right to strike is going to a third world country to manufacture and where few or none of those things are available. Oops, I meant parts of the US.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:45 pm

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 10):
Just like you wouldn't want to give F-22 technology for Iran to build etc.

You are not the America in this analogy though (the EU are) you are the Iran. Thus, presumably you, Iran, would be delighted with F-22 technology and therefore you are saying you will be delighted with A330MRTT technology?
 
User avatar
breiz
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:12 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:07 pm

Quoting BlueFlyer (Reply 12):
"By Americans For Americans" is a perfect motto. It doesn't say what is "by Americans,"

We may assume that it means "Paid by Americans, For Americans"   
 
mogandoCI
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:39 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:09 pm

By Americans, For Americans, but Profits EADS, which feeds into Germany/France's GDP, taxed by their governments, which use those taxes to bail out Greece, so those lazy Greek union members can continue their high wage and low productivity lifestyle.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:38 pm

Quoting eksath (Thread starter):
Please correct me if I got it wrong.

It doesn't matter. There are plenty of good reasons to buy the A330 or 767. Being or not being built in America is not one of them.

Quoting BlueFlyer (Reply 12):
"By Americans For Americans" is a perfect motto.

...because it panders to idiots.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:46 pm

Quoting eksath (Reply 6):
As long as 51% of the components are American MADE, then the claim seems valid. But otherwise it is still not really American built.

What is American Made anymore. Every thing everywhere is composed of parts from all over the globe, INCLUDING the Boeings.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 16):
By Americans, For Americans, but Profits EADS, which feeds into Germany/France's GDP, taxed by their governments, which use those taxes to bail out Greece, so those lazy Greek union members can continue their high wage and low productivity lifestyle.

What kind of car do you drive? (GM, Ford, etc import parts) Checked the labels in your shirts lately? What about our bailouts? Did you know EADS has manufacturing facilities in Wichita Kansas?

It's a global economy now. Look a the content of a new 777 or 787, then tell me all about EADS again.

BTW. I saw Budwieser on sale in a Waitrose South of London. Maybe they should prohibit that.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:04 pm

Quoting avalon2862 (Reply 2):
Europe doesn't enter into that equation -

Yes it does. It is an A330 airframe...an European design.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
delimit
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:08 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:12 pm

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 10):
True, but when you can produce your own military aircraft etc. and a high end technology, its better to keep that in country for what its worth. Just like you wouldn't want to give F-22 technology for Iran to build etc.

Let's not let jingoism trump context. This is a tanker to be produced by a company owned by a group of nations that will probably be our allies for the foreseeable future.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 17):
It doesn't matter. There are plenty of good reasons to buy the A330 or 767. Being or not being built in America is not one of them.

Common sense rears it's ugly head.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 17):
...because it panders to idiots.

Twice.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:20 pm

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 18):
I saw Budwieser on sale in a Waitrose South of London.

They are owned by InBev now, so it's really a European product. (at least if you ask someone from St. Louis anyway)

Quoting Delimit (Reply 20):
Common sense rears it's ugly head.

I know right.

And, by the way, BAe Systems sells more to the US than it does to its home country.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:58 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 21):
They are owned by InBev now, so it's really a European product. (at least if you ask someone from St. Louis anyway)

O M G ! Do the NASCAR fans know this yet? Between that and no more french fries, their calorie intake will be reduced by %75.


I forgot about the InBev thing. I noticed the Free Houses were thinning out a bit again.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
DAL7e7
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:38 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Thu Jun 10, 2010 11:59 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 19):
Yes it does. It is an A330 airframe...an European design.

You do know that Airbus specifically (not broad parent EADS) has an Engineering & Design Center in Mobile? Much of the A350 is being designed there. Significant design work on the A380 was done in ICT.
DAL7e7 is wondering... Do pilots take crash courses?
 
User avatar
eksath
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 1301
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:19 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:07 am

Quoting DAL7e7 (Reply 23):
Much of the A350 is being designed there. Significant design work on the A380 was done in ICT.

Sure. But the A 330 is an existing aircraft. Heck there is already a A330 tanker out there. So this is not designed ground up in Mobile,Alabama by Americans hence the claim "By American,For American" is dubious at best.
World Wide Aerospace Photography
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:35 am

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 13):
So Europe which supports unions, generous social benefits, the right to strike is going to a third world country to manufacture and where few or none of those things are available. Oops, I meant parts of the US.

Exactly. Airbus cannot make a profit from the tanker deal. But having an assembly line for A330s in the US can make them less depended on exchange rates, and still build 2.5 civil and 1.5 tanker A330 per year, once Touluse is busy with the A350 production.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:35 pm

EADS is offering to assemble the A-330F in MOB, along side of the A-330MRTTs sold to the US. But, the A-330 is a product that will see the end of its life as the A-350 and A-359F takes sales away from it. So, what are we talking about for commerical aircraft? 10-15 years at best? The A-330F has only sold some 68 airframes, and more than half of them will be built in France before the MOB facility is up and running. Even an A-330MRTT for the USAF will be built in France and Spain for the first 25-30 airplanes. So, right now we are looking to assemble (not build, not design) some 160-180 total airplanes in MOB, assuming no more sales.

Has anyone looked at the initial production rate out of MOB for EADS? It will not jump from 0 one year to 40 the next year. There will be a period of LRIP for a few years, slowing the deliveries of A-330MRTTs to the USAF unless EADS makes up the difference with new build tankers built in the EU.
 
avalon2862
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:36 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:55 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 19):
Quoting avalon2862 (Reply 2):
Europe doesn't enter into that equation -

Yes it does. It is an A330 airframe...an European design.

No it doesn't... it's being BUILT in Alabama... so unless Alabama joined the EU, Europe only figures into the parts end of things.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:16 pm

Quoting avalon2862 (Reply 27):
No it doesn't... it's being BUILT in Alabama... so unless Alabama joined the EU, Europe only figures into the parts end of things.

But considering how much of the money that goes into the cost of designing and building an aircraft goes to engineering, it most definitely is a factor where it was designed. But then again, Boeing has design offices scattered about the world, and the rednecks who get wrapped up in such things probably don't care anyway.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:30 pm

Quoting avalon2862 (Reply 27):
it's being BUILT in Alabama...

The A-330F and A-330MRTT will be ASSEMBLED in Alabama from parts BUILT in Europe. MOB will be a FAL if EADS gets this contract. There is a big difference between being built and being assembled. It is not being assembled right now in AL, so it is not "being" anything. It will take 3-5 years just to do the EIS (yes, they need an updated EIS as the last one is more than 12 months old), a new SWIPP, design, if they need modifications to the 2008 plan, then construction, hiring new employees, then training those employees. If the contract is given out to EADS-NA on 12 Nov. then they begin all the work in MOB, it will be nearly 5 years before the first MOB assembled airplanes comes off the line.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:02 am

Quoting avalon2862 (Reply 27):
No it doesn't... it's being BUILT in Alabama... so unless Alabama joined the EU, Europe only figures into the parts end of things.

Well, the parts built in Europe will be built in Europe, the flight control software is intellectual property which will remain in Europe, and no matter where it is built or what percentage of US components go into it the a/c will still be an A330.

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 13):
So Europe which supports unions, generous social benefits, the right to strike is going to a third world country to manufacture and where few or none of those things are available. Oops, I meant parts of the US.

Classic.
American unions=bad, other country unions=way of life

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 25):
Exactly. Airbus cannot make a profit from the tanker deal. But having an assembly line for A330s in the US can make them less depended on exchange rates, and still build 2.5 civil and 1.5 tanker A330 per year, once Touluse is busy with the A350 production.

Except Airbus never attempted to open a line in the US to aid in its currency fluctuation, indeed, the line will only be opened if they win the RFP, so somewaht of a red herring. As for them not making a profit, that is built into the RFP, they cannot loose money nor can they use the profit to reduce their bid, virtually no one looses money on military contracts, it why everyone wants in.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:36 am

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 18):
BTW. I saw Budwieser on sale in a Waitrose South of London. Maybe they should prohibit that.

I can't believe I'm researching this on a Saturday morning but...  http://company.monster.co.uk/anheuseruk/

Quote:
The UK is Anheuser-Busch's second-largest market outside the United States. The UK market is managed by Anheuser-Busch Europe Ltd; a fully autonomous business unit within Anheuser-Busch International. Head office functions are based at Thames Link House, Richmond and brewing is carried out by Anheuser-Busch brewmasters at the Budweiser Stag Brewery in Mortlake. Brewing Budweiser locally helps meet the strong demand for Budweiser in the UK.

It's a good bet that any liquid beverage will be brewed locally.   

Quoting Delimit (Reply 20):
Let's not let jingoism trump context

not much chance of that on Mil-Av, my friend   

Quoting Delimit (Reply 20):
This is a tanker to be produced by a company owned by a group of nations that will probably be our allies for the foreseeable future.

  

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 21):
And, by the way, BAe Systems sells more to the US than it does to its home country

Let's be accurate for the sake of completeness.
BAE Systems also BUILDS more in the US than it does in its "home country"
(In the context of this thread by the way, the expression "home country" has particular significances within BAE Systems that are VERY relevant    )

Quoting eksath (Reply 24):
Sure. But the A 330 is an existing aircraft. Heck there is already a A330 tanker out there. So this is not designed ground up in Mobile,Alabama by Americans hence the claim "By American,For American" is dubious at best.

Yep. Perhaps as dubious as "it's the design content that matters"...

Rgds
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:51 am

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 16):
but Profits EADS, which feeds into Germany/France's GDP, taxed by their governments, which use those taxes to bail out Greece, so those lazy Greek union members can continue their high wage and low productivity lifestyle.

Its incredible how much BS can be found on this site. I though i had seen everything but this tops it all.

You have no idea about EADS , Germany/France tax system or Greece.

Greece people are among the hardest working people in the EU even more(over 43hours/day with much less vacations) then Germany.  


ANY competition should be decided solely on technical capabilities and not on political or patriotic demands

The US Air Force should get the best plane for the money.

As the KC-45 is more capable, more modern and efficient it would be a bad choice to decide against it.( and reverse if the KC-767 would be better)

The people which will have to work day in and day out with this planes will care how good they perform and not to what percentage its build in their homeland.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 10:12 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 30):
Except Airbus never attempted to open a line in the US to aid in its currency fluctuation

Nope. It didn't open an assembly line, but it DID open quite a few other things in the USA for that purpose, some of which have already been alluded to in this thread...

Quoting par13del (Reply 30):
American unions=bad, other country unions=way of life

It would certainly be interesting to speculate on which of the two major airframers has been more impacted by unioin activity in the last 5 to 10 years....  

Rgds
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:15 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 32):
ANY competition should be decided solely on technical capabilities and not on political or patriotic demands

The US Air Force should get the best plane for the money.

For military projects I disagree with both of those comments, especially if one has an all volunteer force.
I rue the day when wars etc. are started and initiated because OEM's needs to produce additional weapons of war to boost their bottom line. In my book a nations defense of its interest should be driven by those interest and not those of third parties, an industrial nations industry should be its strength which should be protected, if we globalize industries around the world peace will not break out, the fall of the cold war has seen a massive increase in military spending, how much of that is driven by globalization of trade versus the protection of nations assets? If you cannot or do not want to produce quality weapons of war why exactly would you be going to war, the ability to simply purchase means that you are now susceptible to being a "mercenary" working for the needs / desires of others.
Topic for non-av I guess  
Quoting astuteman (Reply 33):
It would certainly be interesting to speculate on which of the two major airframers has been more impacted by unioin activity in the last 5 to 10 years....

Ahh, now you get into what strikes are held for, in Europe its to get additional days off in the summer without affecting the finished product, in the US, both side are looking to affect the bottom line of the company, sweet  
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 1:12 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 30):

Except Airbus never attempted to open a line in the US to aid in its currency fluctuation, indeed, the line will only be opened if they win the RFP, so somewaht of a red herring.

Dont know about being a red herring, 150 frames seems to be the volume they need to justify a new assembly line, they have successfully done this in China for the A320. The current orderbook for the A332F I think is around 64, not enough alone to justify a new line. Add those 64 plus the KC-X, and then you have business case for a new line. The current /A330-MRTT/KC-30/A330 backlog is around 400 aircraft and would need a new FAL to get the aircraft out in time.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sat Jun 12, 2010 3:16 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 35):
Dont know about being a red herring,

It was related to the post below, on the importance of EADS minimizing their "currency situation"

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 25):
But having an assembly line for A330s in the US can make them less depended on exchange rates,

As the astute one mentioned, they were already dealing with this before, during and after the tanker fiasco

Quoting astuteman (Reply 33):
Nope. It didn't open an assembly line, but it DID open quite a few other things in the USA for that purpose, some of which have already been alluded to in this thread...
Quoting zeke (Reply 35):
150 frames seems to be the volume they need to justify a new assembly line, they have successfully done this in China for the A320.

I don't think that China line has anything to do with 150 frames, contractually they are initially limited to 40 or so per year, that's what 3-4 years production, they will be building A320's on that line well into the forseable future, long after they pass 150. If that's all they wanted they could have been shipped from Europe, that's where the few thousand in use came from  
 
Acheron
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:32 pm

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 10):
True, but when you can produce your own military aircraft etc. and a high end technology, its better to keep that in country for what its worth.
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 7):
but designed in America is a big factor as well. Design work is where technology is and in my opinion is more valuable than manufacturing.

That must be why Boeing decided to bid with the EH101 for the Marine One replacement, right?.

That kind of put to bed the claims of those who said that Boeing should be given the Tanker deal because Boeing kept things american and whatnot.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 16):
taxed by their governments, which use those taxes to bail out Greece, so those lazy Greek union members can continue their high wage and low productivity lifestyle.

General Motors.


Pot, kettle, black...thats all there is into the whole EADS-Boeing business when it comes to weapon procurement in the US.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:19 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 36):
I don't think that China line has anything to do with 150 frames, contractually they are initially limited to 40 or so per year, that's what 3-4 years production, they will be building A320's on that line well into the forseable future, long after they pass 150.

The assembly line in China is not doing 40 a month, the combined A320 series assembly lines in Germany, France, and China are not even doing 40 aircraft a month.

I would be surprised if they go much above 4 a month in China.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:54 pm

Par Americans. Pour des Américains.
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:42 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 32):
ANY competition should be decided solely on technical capabilities and not on political or patriotic demands

The US Air Force should get the best plane for the money.

As the KC-45 is more capable, more modern and efficient it would be a bad choice to decide against it.( and reverse if the KC-767 would be better)

I have asked this question before. Where is the A-330MRTT more capable, efficient, and modern that the Boeing offered KC-767NG?

Buying the best airplane for the money is already in the RFP, it is looking for the lowest priced tanker.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 32):
43hours/day

Do you mean 43 hours per work week?

Quoting zeke (Reply 35):
Quoting par13del (Reply 30):

Except Airbus never attempted to open a line in the US to aid in its currency fluctuation, indeed, the line will only be opened if they win the RFP, so somewaht of a red herring.

Dont know about being a red herring, 150 frames seems to be the volume they need to justify a new assembly line, they have successfully done this in China for the A320. The current orderbook for the A332F I think is around 64, not enough alone to justify a new line. Add those 64 plus the KC-X, and then you have business case for a new line. The current /A330-MRTT/KC-30/A330 backlog is around 400 aircraft and would need a new FAL to get the aircraft out in time.

But by the time the MOB FAL is up and fully producing, more than half of the A-330Fs currently on order will have been delivered. Also all current orders for the A-330MRTT will also have been built. I have seen nothing firm that EADS will move the pax version of the A-330 production to MOB, only the A-330F and A-330MRTTs, only speculation that will happen.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 37):
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 7):
but designed in America is a big factor as well. Design work is where technology is and in my opinion is more valuable than manufacturing.

That must be why Boeing decided to bid with the EH101 for the Marine One replacement, right?.

That kind of put to bed the claims of those who said that Boeing should be given the Tanker deal because Boeing kept things american and whatnot.

Boeing does not have a current helio design ready to compete for the VH-X program, and LM has already teamed up with Sakorski.

Quoting zeke (Reply 38):
Quoting par13del (Reply 36):
I don't think that China line has anything to do with 150 frames, contractually they are initially limited to 40 or so per year, that's what 3-4 years production, they will be building A320's on that line well into the forseable future, long after they pass 150.

The assembly line in China is not doing 40 a month, the combined A320 series assembly lines in Germany, France, and China are not even doing 40 aircraft a month.

I would be surprised if they go much above 4 a month in China.

I think you mis-read him, he said 40 airplanes per year in China, which is just under your estimate of 4 airplanes per month.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:22 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
I have asked this question before. Where is the A-330MRTT more capable, efficient, and modern that the Boeing offered KC-767NG?

Must be in a lot of places for Boeing not only to dump the KC-767J, KC-767A, and KC-767AT for the KC-767 NewGen.

Correct me if I am wrong, is this the 3rd or 4th 767 tanker configuration Boeing has offered the USAF ?

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):

Buying the best airplane for the money is already in the RFP, it is looking for the lowest priced tanker.

No, if it was just the lowest priced tanker, the KC-30 would be selected. They had to inflate some numbers for the KC-767 to get a look in.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
But by the time the MOB FAL is up and fully producing, more than half of the A-330Fs currently on order will have been delivered.

Rubbish. Airbus is not pushing through the 332Fs that quickly, the 330 has been outselling the 787 and 777, they have a lot of pax models to build. The FAL should only take less than a year to build, just look at what they were able to do in China.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
I think you mis-read him

I did indeed, my mistake.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:16 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 41):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
I have asked this question before. Where is the A-330MRTT more capable, efficient, and modern that the Boeing offered KC-767NG?

Must be in a lot of places for Boeing not only to dump the KC-767J, KC-767A, and KC-767AT for the KC-767 NewGen.

Correct me if I am wrong, is this the 3rd or 4th 767 tanker configuration Boeing has offered the USAF ?

It is the third version. Boeing is not offering the Japanese KC-767J or the Italian version of the KC-767A (the USAF 2003 version offered by Boeing was also called the KC-767A)..

Quoting zeke (Reply 41):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):

Buying the best airplane for the money is already in the RFP, it is looking for the lowest priced tanker.

No, if it was just the lowest priced tanker, the KC-30 would be selected. They had to inflate some numbers for the KC-767 to get a look in.

Incorrect, it is not the offered price of the airplane from the OEMs, but the adjusted lowest price according to USAF calculations.

Quoting zeke (Reply 41):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
But by the time the MOB FAL is up and fully producing, more than half of the A-330Fs currently on order will have been delivered.

Rubbish. Airbus is not pushing through the 332Fs that quickly, the 330 has been outselling the 787 and 777, they have a lot of pax models to build. The FAL should only take less than a year to build, just look at what they were able to do in China.

The US is not China. There are building standards, local and federal that have to be met, an EIS study, and a SWIPP developed, before construction can begin. Boeing is about 18 months into their SC Plant construction, with at least another year to go, before hiring and training can start, or machinery can be installed into the building. The MOB FAL will need up to 5 years before it will be ready to push the first airplane out the door. Don't forget, the contract isn't signed until 12 Nov., that will push the stuydies into the winter months, typically rain and cold. Spring in this area brings massive thunderstaorms, and tornados, the summer months you can have hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:05 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 42):
Incorrect, it is not the offered price of the airplane from the OEMs, but the adjusted lowest price according to USAF calculations.

So you are saying you were incorrect in reply 40 ? as that is what I was saying....the USAF is not looking for "the lowest priced tanker"

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 42):
The US is not China.

May as well be, look at the latest US bonds, seems China owns more of the US than ever before.

As for the construction works, EADS already got the site selected, they already have the deign approved, and they even had a builder ready to go, and they already had their groundbreaking ceremony 2 years ago.

The FAL for the A330-200Fs that EADS wants to build would be more like the FAL built for the P-8, not the 787 in terms of size and output.

Next to the FAL will be a another facility where the tanker conversions are done, that will be very similar to the setup they have in Spain. Qantas Defence also built a conversion facility for the RAAF KC-30s in Brisbane Airport, that took around 8 months to complete.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:57 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 43):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 42):
Incorrect, it is not the offered price of the airplane from the OEMs, but the adjusted lowest price according to USAF calculations.

So you are saying you were incorrect in reply 40 ? as that is what I was saying....the USAF is not looking for "the lowest priced tanker
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
Buying the best airplane for the money is already in the RFP, it is looking for the lowest priced tanker.

How did I contradict myself in both replies? The lowest price is that defined in the RFP, not the price per unit from the OEMs, but the USAF adjusted price after it considers all of the other pricing inputs. That will be the total adjust price per tanker. The lowest will be selected, unless the 1% rule kicks in.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:07 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 44):
How did I contradict myself in both replies?

They are not looking for the lowest priced tanker, "price" reflects what the USAF will pay the OEM.

When you buy a car, what you pay the dealer is the price. You do not pay them for 40 years of fuel, maintenance, etc at the same time, nor does the dealer receive that money over the 40 years.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3644
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:41 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 41):
Correct me if I am wrong, is this the 3rd or 4th 767 tanker configuration Boeing has offered the USAF ?

It is also to support about the tenth change of specs from the AF...... only a fool keeps the same package on the table when the specs change...

Quoting zeke (Reply 41):
No, if it was just the lowest priced tanker, the KC-30 would be selected. They had to inflate some numbers for the KC-767 to get a look in.

time after time the issue is not the cheapest hull but the cheapest over all system. would you buy a Hummer is your garage was too narrow for it and the cost of expanding the garage was twice the cost of the car?

Quoting zeke (Reply 43):
The FAL for the A330-200Fs that EADS wants to build would be more like the FAL built for the P-8, not the 787 in terms of size and output.

the FAL for the P-8 is a 1940's building built before any building codes or environmental processes to build seaplanes.. it is the same line that was used for the KC135's, and 707's and overwintering a circus after the war.... If you're saying they want just a simple 5 position linear assembly line then that's what the 787 line will be... and due to wing length, it would need the size.. However EADS likes the assembly line short and then an outfitting building that uses a docking bay concept... so there are two large buildings.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:36 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 46):

It is also to support about the tenth change of specs from the AF...... only a fool keeps the same package on the table when the specs change...

As it is being pointed out in various circles, the KC-767 has needed some significant tweaks to make it, while the KC-30 is only needing minor tweaks. People have been pointing out the future upgradability of the KC-767 would appear to be very costly, and that has not been factored in.

Quoting kanban (Reply 46):
time after time the issue is not the cheapest hull but the cheapest over all system. would you buy a Hummer is your garage was too narrow for it and the cost of expanding the garage was twice the cost of the car?

I do understand it is the cheapest of the hypothetical numbers that are generated, but those numbers generated do not bear any reflation on the "price" being paid by the USAF to the OEM.

Quoting kanban (Reply 46):
the FAL for the P-8 is a 1940's building built before any building codes or environmental processes to build seaplanes..

Ok, I didn’t know that, I thought they setup a new low rate parallel production line for the P-8.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 8:36 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 45):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 44):
How did I contradict myself in both replies?

They are not looking for the lowest priced tanker, "price" reflects what the USAF will pay the OEM.

When you buy a car, what you pay the dealer is the price. You do not pay them for 40 years of fuel, maintenance, etc at the same time, nor does the dealer receive that money over the 40 years.

On 9 July, each OEM will submit their offer, including a price per airplane and package, but that is only the first factor used to determine price. To that the USAF will add an adjustment for each tanker offered. Those cost will vary for each tanker offered and will include LCC for 40 years, estimated fuel burn for 40 years, estimated maintenance/depot costs for 40 years (10 depot cycles), and milCon costs based on the size and weight of each offer at all 11 bases the USAF has said could be the basing of the KC-X. All of these, and others will be totalled together to determine which is the lowest price offer for purchase and ownership.

Quoting zeke (Reply 47):
As it is being pointed out in various circles, the KC-767 has needed some significant tweaks to make it, while the KC-30 is only needing minor tweaks. People have been pointing out the future upgradability of the KC-767 would appear to be very costly, and that has not been factored in.

Well, everyone does have an opinion. But their opinions, yours, or mine are not factors considered by the USAF for the selection. Those people who point out the future upgradability of the KC-767, or KC-30, have no idea what they are talking about. Even today, the USAF has no idea what modifications/upgrades/design changes/mission packages/etc. either design will need in 10, 15,20,or 30 years from now. Upgradability is not a factor of consideration with this RFP.

Quoting zeke (Reply 47):
Quoting kanban (Reply 46):
time after time the issue is not the cheapest hull but the cheapest over all system. would you buy a Hummer is your garage was too narrow for it and the cost of expanding the garage was twice the cost of the car?

I do understand it is the cheapest of the hypothetical numbers that are generated, but those numbers generated do not bear any reflation on the "price" being paid by the USAF to the OEM.

As I said, that price will only be one of the considered factors during the evaluation period. It only becomes important once a contract is signed. As I said earlier, I believe that EADS needs to underbid Boeing by about $50M per airplane to be able to assure a win. That is a total of $8.95B for the entire 179 airplane contract. The $50M spread over 40 years is only $1.25M per airplane per year, not a very unreasonable costs, and may in fact be a low guesstiment. My guess of the $50M includes LCC, operating, maintenance and MilCon, and I know it may be considerable higher.

So, if Boeing submits a bid of $150M per tanker, adding the $50M in for all the USAF costs, it comes to $200M per tanker for 40 years. If EADS submits the same $150M per tanker price, but its fuel burn is, say 10% higher (Boeing says it is 24% higher, EADS says it is 6% higher), maintnance costs about the same, but MilCon is double, that adds much more than the $50M added to Boeing. Just to remain within the 1%, that means if the KC-767 add ons are $50M each airplane, then the KC-30 cannot be more than $52M each, for a total price of $202M. I just don't think EADS can do that unless they sell each USAF tanker at a significant loss. Don't forget, EADS has to add in the costs of building their FAL and conversion facility, ramp rents, and shipping costs to ship the parts from the EU to the US. Boeing's only extra costs is flying the green airplane from WA to KS. Everything else (parts shipments, etc. os already figuered into their production costs).
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13384
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: "By Americans, For Americans" Claim On Eads Web

Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:36 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 48):
Just to remain within the 1%, that means if the KC-767 add ons are $50M each airplane, then the KC-30 cannot be more than $52M each, for a total price of $202M.

Doesn't that evaluated cost include the IFARA results? You don't seem to have mentioned that.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: petera380, Stitch and 4 guests