Air Force$35 billion contract

[ABSOLUT CHARVEL]

US Air Force$35 billion contract to build airborne refueling planes went to Airbus. I am not sure that a contract of this nature using my US tax dollars should go to a contractor outside the US. It is like off shoreing where jobs could be sustained here but the Goverment did not pick a US company. I'd like to see that question toss at the president hopefuls that talk about US employment being a top priority.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23413217

[Joe_Steeler]

I believe it is Northrup/Grumman using the Airbus A330 frame, isn't it? so it is not all going to the EC.
Maybe Boeing thought that them being in Washington state will guarantee a contract award or maybe the government is all screwed up. I read somewhere that they are opening a plant in Alabama for assembly so some jobs will stay in the states. But you are right, when I saw the Airbus name in the hat I had to double take.

All the details will be out in due time.

[CharvelRocker]

Nothrop Grumman is a US company. Probably more for reasons of Airbus being able to produce enough to meet demand quickly more than anything.

[åron]

Welcome to the new world order.

To summarize, since apparently no one reads these stories: Airbus offered a larger, better plane with more capabilities. Boeing offered a smaller cheaper plane with inferior capabilities. The Airbus will be built primarily in Europe, though the engines will be American and likely much of the proprietary military technology will come from Northrop Grumman.

[pott]

I don't get that. The US have been subcontracting weapons for a long time. Your coastguards even use French and Italian helicopters over some US models.


Facts are, the Airbus proposal was better, more efficient and more modern. Why would they go for the Boeing KC767 which would have been way more expensive in the long run?

Countries have been subcontracting weapons systems for ages and I fail to see why the US wouldn't do it too. This is not about the job I'm affraid.

[horns666]

What I do understand is eatin' cootch with my thumb in their bung...the girls dig it..

[JacksonDean]

So it's not bad enough that Airbus Industrie can undercut US companies offers in the commercial world because they're a European taxpayer subsidized company, now we're going to let them do it with our own tax dollars.

Why don't we get the Russians or the Chinese the build our fighters too?

[Tashtego]

I look forward to the mass protests and harsh political statements in Europe about supporting the American war machine.

[Jackson/Charvelfan]

I am sad to see that we are taking yet another aircraft over seeas as US aircraft companies are pricing them selves out of the market but, it is about time to finaly retire the KC135 (updated several times since the 50's) but still serving the reserves move the KC10 (updated a few times since the purchase in the 80's of a small qty) to the reserves. The US mil has recently done the same thing with the helicopter that serves as Marine 1 so if it is good enough for the President! This is really sad when you think about it as the US aerospace industry used to be a leader in this area.

[fett]

Just WOW Heads should roll at Boeing for letting this one get away. That scandal that got the contract busted awhile back must have really pissed off someone. And Alabama gets a new plant. You know how that works. They give away the farm in tax incentives. I guess the 'bama senators have some clout. Any bets that they nickname the plane "The FROG"? "France Refueling Our Gear"

[pott]

Just WOW Heads should roll at Boeing for letting this one get away. That scandal that got the contract busted awhile back must have really pissed off someone. And Alabama gets a new plant. You know how that works. They give away the farm in tax incentives. I guess the 'bama senators have some clout. Any bets that they nickname the plane "The FROG"? "France Refueling Our Gear"

though Airbus isn't French, neither is McD/Douglas. And if it were where would the issue be? You're already using French materials.


And just because I believe it's a beautiful machinery:

[fett]

I know all about Airbus and the subsidies that the countries that are members use to support it. The bottom line is Boeing fucked up bigtime. That contract is worth 100 billion dollars over it's life. As for the Frog jab, I am an American and that's what we do.

[pott]

Eh, I'm French and I don't poke at the yanks... yet

Boeing is strongly state helped too. A bit too much it seemed as some recent events let through. But I think that's normal in a way, it stimulates the economy. And that's true, Boeing had the expertise and experience to propose a better product. Seems they didn't. On another hand the A330 is way more modern and efficient than the B767 so it seemed a bit obvious.

[fett]

Nothing personal. I owned two '60's Renaults. How French does that get?:ROTF:

[JacksonDean]

Eh, I'm French and I don't poke at the yanks... yet

Boeing is strongly state helped too. A bit too much it seemed as some recent events let through. But I think that's normal in a way, it stimulates the economy. And that's true, Boeing had the expertise and experience to propose a better product. Seems they didn't. On another hand the A330 is way more modern and efficient than the B767 so it seemed a bit obvious.

Nope, you're wrong about that. That Boeing benefits of military contracts is different from full-fledged subsidizing by the American Tax Payers. In order for Airbus to even think about cracking the American Commercial Airline industry, they practically gave American Airlines 60 A300s. The only way they could do that is because the taxpayers of four European countries footed the bill for the design, development, and implementation of the aircraft.

The A330 isn't really more advanced than the later 767 variants unless you mean it's equipped with a Fly By Wire system that makes decisions as to what the pilot really meant when he moved the joystick (yes, it's a joystick). So all the current tanker pilots will now have to go through a whole new training program to get their ratings on this A330, yet another expense to the taxpayers.

I don't know if Fett is right and Boeing somehow dicked the dog with this or what; but it's ridiculous.

And by the way, I have nothing against Airbus aircraft; they do the job, they're functional. Personally, I think the wing on the A330/A340 is remarkably designed. I think they have a screwed up philosophy on the role of the pilot, but it's their company to decide that policy.

It doesn't bother me that the contract's not going to Boeing, per se, as it does that it's going to a foreign company, one run by a consortium of Governments that do not have America's best interests in mind. Hypothetically, were McDonnell Douglas still around and the contract went from Boeing to MD, I'd have less of a problem with it.

Also, I see a lot of BS about 'jobs for Americans" which is nice; however comma but the Americans are getting the crumbs of the contract: Final Assembly. Big deal. The bulk of the work will be done by other people. They don't mention in any of the articles or statements how many European jobs will be created to fulfill the contract. Then the numbers would be compared and people here might start demanding accountability from their government... and the government wouldn't want that, now would they?