Airbus to build new Tanker

[turbofabricator]

The Boeing company just LOST the air refueling tanker contract to Airbus. Can you BLEIEVE THAT?!?!? Our Air Force pilots will now have to rely on Euro TRASH. (I'm NOT implying that the Airbus airplanes are unsafe, by the way.) Airbus is a Government subsidized manufacturer. They do NOT play on the same ball field as Boeing. They have been selling airplanes at a net loss for .........well.............EVER . How can a public corporation compete with a Government subsidized entity? Write your Congressmen/women DEMADING that we keep our Military contracts here at home (where they belong). The 767 assembly line will now have to shut down (so they say) creating a huge loss to our work force (est. 9,000 jobs). I personally have been working the 767 line for the last few weeks. How can Congress and the Air Force purchase a military tanker from a European supplier? I guess with Democrats controlling Congress, we all should EXPECT them to approve a European win. After-all, Democrats think that EVERYTHING in Europe is better. Ask any airline pilot what brand of airplane they prefere. MOST will say Boeing.
This is the latest in European supplied military contracts. US soldiers haven't been carrying Colts for a long time. Instead, the US military's handgun of choice is a Beretta developed in Italy. Gulfstream has been replaced by Brazilian manufacturer Embraer as the military's supplier of reconnaissance planes. And in an especially symbolic move, the Pentagon also decided not to order President Bush's new helicopter fleet from US manufacturer Sikorsky, but from AgustaWestland, an Italian-British joint venture.
WONDER why the US manufacturing is falling behind. What does THIS do the the Euro-dollar balance? Are we all going MAD? The Govenrment will still WASTE billions on social programs, but give contracts to a foreign company and potentially cause more un-employment. Write you Congress.

 

[Junior Samples]

What does THIS do the the Euro-dollar balance?

well insted of the Euro worth a buck fifty to our buck...prolly be 2 bucks in six months.

Sad news to hear, guess they think we can get by with arbys, mcdonalds, tacobell and wendys

 

[Cme2fly]

I heard the planes will be manufactured in the US..Alabama ?? One of the possible reasons that Boeing lost the tanker contracts is because some executives at Boeing were making some promises to some special interests in Washington. Someone blew the whistle and that was last I heard of that. Boeing is a superior product IMO and a US Air Force tanker should be a US product..

 

[kh440]

I ahd heard similar rumours as far as the lobbyists and possible shady dealings, but overall I have kind of mixed feelings: On the one hand it is kind of refreshing to see the government actually trying to SAVE our tax dollars for a change, but on the other hand what next? The next presidential limo will be a lexus???

 

[turbofabricator]

I heard the planes will be manufactured in the US..Alabama ?? One of the possible reasons that Boeing lost the tanker contracts is because some executives at Boeing were making some promises to some special interests in Washington. Someone blew the whistle and that was last I heard of that. Boeing is a superior product IMO and a US Air Force tanker should be a US product..

True. Two Boeing executives are now in Federal prison.
The airframe will still be built in Europe with modifications to convert a passenger plane into a tanker performed in the U.S. (Alabama) by Northrup/Grumman. They are building a facility in Alabama.
Because of the un-ethical actions of a Boeing exec., I pesonally (along with EVERYONE else) have to take ethics training and a host of other really hideous classes EVERY year. Knee-jerk reaction. One ex-senior Air Force procurement officer (Darleen Druyun) is now a "cell mate" with Mr. Mike Sears (Boeing ex-CFO). That incident will hamper any future military contracts, I think. They have cost Boeing billions of dollars. Darleen was hired as a Vice President, for her part in "greasing the skids" on the 767 Tanker deal. Boeing had already won the contract, but it was then revoked. John McCain was instrumental in canceling the contract. I do NOT blame McCain for that, I blame Darleen and Mike for that. 100% The actions of two (probably ALOT more than that, though) cost the rest of us a TON of money, and reputation. Money corrupts, absolute.

 

[Ttype83]

That's bullsh!t... My company is also looking at the AirFK..I'm not a fan. The 767 tanker would have been a good airframe for a tanker, the 777 would have been a great platform. Someone in DC has their hands in airFK you can bet on that.

 

[ronbuick]

Sorry to here that Ken, just read about this in today's morning paper and thought about you guys over there, that just plain sucks, I'm getting to the point I just do not give a s&%t any more, it seems nobody cares about the demise of this country, buy ammo and dry goods and let the revolution and or anarchary begin. Here in Idaho they just re-raised a temporay state tax from 5% to 6% back to 5% for 6 months and then back to 6% perm. Now the Governor wants to raise the fees 6 fold on yearly fees to license your vehicle staight across the board, so that means folks like me and there are a lot of us will pay the same on my beater 87 daily driver, 78 chevy truck as Joe
rich guys will pay for there Bmw's, MB's, Porsches and the like. Yea, real fair.

Ron

 

[UNGN]

The only bright spot in this deal is Airbus will see how cheap it is to make planes in the US vs. Europe.

I deal with European Aerospace companies on a daily basis. I'll ask "where's Jorg or Gunnar, he owns me something". The reply is always "Oh, he's out on holiday for 6 weeks". I'm always amazed when anything gets done over there.

 

[UNGN]

And in an especially symbolic move, the Pentagon also decided not to order President Bush's new helicopter fleet from US manufacturer Sikorsky, but from AgustaWestland, an Italian-British joint venture.
WONDER why the US manufacturing is falling behind.

You can blame Bush for a lot of things, but you can't blame him for that one. Hillary Clinton was on the Agusta Westland team and the Helicopters won't show up until long after Bush us gone.

 

[turbofabricator]

You can blame Bush for a lot of things, but you can't blame him for that one. Hillary Clinton was on the Agusta Westland team and the Helicopters won't show up until long after Bush us gone.

Yep, I don't blame GWB for that.
I am amazed that our SUPERIOR technology is second to cost. I have co-workers that were in Desert Storm as Air Force Tech's and they have nothng good to say about the Euro military planes. ANCIENT technology. Northrup is a good company with many high tech programs. WHY, I mean WHY, send tax dollars to Europe? IF it was going to save a few million dollars initially, what is the REAL cost to the tax payer over time? Sending Billions and billions of dollars to the French and German that REFUSE to participate in military action agianst global Terrorism, and then give them a military contract. I'm NOT talkin' chump change, either. $50 BILLION. And they get to reap the rewards of the oil for food scandal, in which they are DIRTY TO THE CORE, (all the way to Chirac's son) OK......Just give them a multi BILLION dollar contract and send a message to the world: "Hey.......Don't abide by international laws......Just do what ever you want to make millions illegally, we won't do anything, except give you lucrative military contracts, and screw the American work force!!!" I have no proof that there is dirty deeds done dirt cheap in the upper levels of appropriations, but it doesn't add up. Period. Guess I'm just not good at math.
What do the citizens of Europe think about thier dear Airbus now participating in U.S. War Mongering (as they put it)?? Maybe in reality, Airbus id\s providing the Tankers for Free, to back door their participation in the war? If that is the real case, then I'm All for it. (IF the Airbus Tanker works as required) Now, THAT is a way to get European involvement in the Global War on Terrorism. Have them build the Tankers, then default on the payment. Send a note to Congress. Who cares if we pizz them off? They already HATE us, right?:biggrin:

 

[Cme2fly]

Whats wrong with the 707?:biggrin: Who would of thought the replacement would be a Scarebus

 

[turbofabricator]

Whats wrong with the 707?:biggrin: Who would of thought the replacement would be a Scarebus

Nothing, other than the airframe itself is 45 years old. The reliability is a factor nowadays. Our Air Force, Navy, Marines NEED a reliable tanker when in combat. There have been situatuions where the 44 year old airplane can't make it into service, and they have to modify the fighter/bombers mission accordingly. The Tanker contract has been reviewed MANY, MANY times over the last few years, while our airmen are in combat. Can't figure that one out. Go ahead and waste billions on socail programs and haggle over the cost of a tanker. The NEA has LOST 8 BILLION dollars and it can't be accounted for. Where's the OUTRAGE over that?
I'm NOT saying that the Pentagon should waste tax payers dollars. But, get with the program here. European companies getting military money and they don't even support us in the current war? P-L-E-A-S-E!!! That alone should BAN them from bidding on the contract. Japan builds body panels for the 767. THEY support us in the war on Terror.

 

[LukeSTi]

I don't really think AGE is the true issue here. I am in the Marines and I am a CH-53D pilot, that helicopter first rolled off the assembly lines in 1969. Some of the D's are actually upgraded Super A's which were assembled begining in 1966. Thus I fly a 40+ year old helicopter which has a tremendous amount of dynamic components and vibrations compared to a commercial airliner which sets up AR tracks at 350000 feet.

The real problem is the Air Force CAN NOT do more with less as the Marines have had to do for decades. In their never ending quest to posess the newest and most technologically advanced aircraft they often lose site of the fact that what they have currently does a damn good job. Now for a new fighter I can understand needing the newest capabalities, but for a tanker!?!?

 

[UNGN]

That alone should BAN them from bidding on the contract. Japan builds body panels for the 767. THEY support us in the war on Terror.

Japan also bought KC-767's. Sometimes I think the Japanese love America more than we do.

 

[UNGN]

I don't really think AGE is the true issue here. I am in the Marines and I am a CH-53D pilot, that helicopter first rolled off the assembly lines in 1969. Some of the D's are actually upgraded Super A's which were assembled begining in 1966. Thus I fly a 40+ year old helicopter which has a tremendous amount of dynamic components and vibrations compared to a commercial airliner which sets up AR tracks at 350000 feet.

The real problem is the Air Force CAN NOT do more with less as the Marines have had to do for decades. In their never ending quest to posess the newest and most technologically advanced aircraft they often lose site of the fact that what they have currently does a damn good job. Now for a new fighter I can understand needing the newest capabalities, but for a tanker!?!?

The KC-135 was designed in 1954. The LAST KC-135 currently flying was built in 1965. It's replacement is already 5 years overdue.

We could re-engine them with all of the engines from the MD-80's American Airlines will be parking in the next 5 years for practically free, but they are at the point in their lives that they need to be re-winged and re-fuselaged, too.

The V-22 was supposed to replace your H-53 15 years ago, but we all know how that turned out.

 

[jetmech]

I work on boeing's corp. jets and i also have to take all these ethics courses? Most of this doesnt even pertain to my job. But all contractors have to take them

 

[Cme2fly]

The KC-135 was designed in 1954. The LAST KC-135 currently flying was built in 1965. It's replacement is already 5 years overdue.

We could re-engine them with all of the engines from the MD-80's American Airlines will be parking in the next 5 years for practically free, but they are at the point in their lives that they need to be re-winged and re-fuselaged, too.

The V-22 was supposed to replace your H-53 15 years ago, but we all know how that turned out.

Boeing's 707 line was open until 1991 for military variants..What happen to the KC-10 as a replace. I do realize that McDonald Douglas is no longer.

 

[UNGN]

Boeing's 707 line was open until 1991 for military variants..What happen to the KC-10 as a replace. I do realize that McDonald Douglas is no longer.

That was just for remfg parts and modifying the planes, not making new ones. They've all been re-engined from the original Turbojets, with the latest versions getting 25 year old CFM56 variants and there were J-stars, RC and AWAC's variants that were built and modified right up until the cold war ended.

 

[turbofabricator]

The KC-135 also is alot less aerodynamic than a 767, which causes poor fuel burn. (But, with a HUGE tank, who really cares.:biggrin: ) Airframes do have a service life. Exceed it and THIS can happen : YouTube - C130 Crash

 

[LukeSTi]

Fuel To the Fire

Well, just to add some more Euro-fuel to the fire.

The contract for the new Presidential helicopter recently went to......


drumroll......


EuroCopter/Agusta. Thats right folks the President of the United States will be flying in a EuroCopter flown by U.S. Marines. Of course to get the contract EC/A had to build a final assembly facility in Pennsylvania so the gov could say that the aircraft are "made in the USA".

Sikorsky was the other front-runner for the contract with their very nice, American made S-92VIP. However Congress wanted them to outsource the production so much, that at least one component be built in each of the 50 states. Sikorsky would not do so and hence they lost the contract.