| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| Air Refueling Contract | |
| 2008-03-07 | |
| According to the Financial Times, the UK MOD is set to announce that they will give the new tanker contract to a consortium led by EADS/Airbus, with their new A330 tanker. This is compared to the Boeing BAE consortium with the 767 (the same as the USAF). The award of this contract is beleived to have been for a number of reason (other than operational) such as the severe delay on many other BAE projects (Astute SSN, Eurofighter, Nimrod (maritime patrol), and Brimstone ( battlefield attack weapon). ALso of concern is the controversy with the USAF order of the 767 tanker, which led to the redignation of the Boeing CEO Phil Condit. And no doubt, the Airbus consortia giving excellent rates in order to come into the market (similar to the low rates Lockheed gave to the RAF as C-130j launch customer). BAE will not be too upset, as they produce 20% of the A330, and Rolls-Royce prouce the engines (as they do for the 767). The A330 will be up to 16 new build airframes, and 4-5 used airframes, compared to the all used (Ex British Airways) 767 offer. Interestingly the RAF has a history of using tankers no other nation uses (Victor, Tristar, VC-10), and using ex Briish Airways Aircraft (Tristar and VC-10). May have been missed during the weekend screwballapalooza, but is continuing to make our local/state news. Personally after eurocopter and a380 I wonder about this as anything other than a deal to make a deal but since Britain is voting (?) as to whether to be themselves or a pininsula of a pininsula I leave that open. Also, Airbus has been in Wichita for a number of years manufacturing. -first post so mods, suggestions if any please-
| |
| Posted by:swksvolFF |
| #8 Boeing got sand bagged by the Air Force. They were told the Air Force wanted a KC-135 replacement and cargo capacity was not important. So they submitted the B767 vs the A330 which cost 1/3 more. Otherwise Boeing would have submitted the B777 since both airframes were considered. |
| Posted by: ed 2008-03-07 22:33 |
| #7 Congratulations on your first post swksvoFF! Nice background comments, too. More, please (yes, I am greedy!). |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-03-07 22:18 |
| #6 See also PR NEWSWIRE/US NEWSIRE > A [USA]GOVERNMENT THAT WORKS AGZ ITSELF HAS NO DEFENSE -THE EADS TANKER CONTRADICTION. USA-USAF awarding tanker contract to EU consortium well-known from resorting to illegal subsidies harmful to US interests??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-03-07 21:25 |
| #5 If Boeing were smart (heh), they'd sit down, figure out how they lost and come back in the next competition. Remember folks, the tanker contract is being done in three parts, and we just did part 1. Next time, Boeing: use the 777 as the base plane, and make sure your total life-span costs for the plane slide under the A330. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2008-03-07 18:11 |
| #4 This just showed up on the Seattle _PI's aerospace page: looks like Boeing may appeal. Boeing tanker debriefing over The Air Force has finished briefing Boeing on why it came up short on the tanker competition. Boeing says it has "significant concerns.'' Here is the latest just issued by Boeing. Boeing: Uncertainty About Process Remains After Air Force Tanker Debrief ST. LOUIS, March 7, 2008 - The U.S. Air Force has completed a debriefing for The Boeing Company [NYSE:BA] during which acquisition officials sought to explain why they selected a team of Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) for a contract to replace aerial refueling tankers. The debriefing on Friday came one week after the Air Force's surprising announcement that it had chosen the Northrop-EADS team over the Boeing KC-767 tanker offering. "We spent several hours with Air Force leaders, listening and probing, all in an effort to better understand the reasoning behind their decisions," said Mark McGraw, Boeing vice president and program manager of the KC-767 tanker. "While we are grateful for the timely debriefing, we left the room with significant concerns about the process in several areas, including program requirements related to capabilities, cost and risk; evaluation of the bids and the ultimate decision." "What is clear now is that reports claiming that the Airbus offering won by a wide margin could not be more inaccurate," said McGraw. Boeing officials said that they will take the next few days to evaluate the data presented and will give serious consideration to filing a protest. "Our plan now is to work through the weekend to come to a decision on our course of action early next week," said McGraw. "It will be a very rigorous and deliberative process to ensure we're balancing the needs of the warfighter with our desire to be treated fairly. For decades Boeing has been recognized as a defense company that never takes lightly protests of our customers' decisions." |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2008-03-07 17:44 |
| #3 Boeing was supposed to be debriefed by the USAF today as to why they lost; i just checked the on line Seattle Times and they have no new info about that, but they did offer two interesting and probably related tidbits: expect another delay in the 787 and the Boeing Commercial Aircraft Manufacturing Chief is retiring ( 5 years early). the UK tanker contract was undoubtedly slated to be a 'hanger-on' to the USAF one. they have probably negotiated favorable prices based on quantity.....(disclaimer: this is pure speculation on my part) |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2008-03-07 17:03 |
| #2 Actually theres a very good chance they chose the Airbus offering because the USAF just told Airbus they were going to buy 179 or so A330 based tankers to replace the KC-135. |
| Posted by: Valentine 2008-03-07 13:42 |
| #1 I'm surprised it didn't go to a Saudi Arabian company or something. Ahh, the joys of globalization. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-03-07 12:52 |