Posted on 05/04/2009 2:43:55 PM PDT by jazusamo
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama may have to use a veto threat to preserve Pentagon plans for a winner-take-all competition to start a new multibillion-dollar U.S. aerial-refueling fleet, the head of the House of Representatives' Armed Services Committee said on Monday.
"That is probably where we'll start and end," Rep. Ike Skelton, a Missouri Democrat, said in reply to a question about moves in Congress that would guarantee Air Force purchases from both rival tanker suppliers -- Boeing Co and a team of Northrop Grumman Corp and Europe's EADS.
Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat who chairs the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee, and other powerful lawmakers have endorsed a dual-source strategy as a means of jump-starting the long-delayed acquisition of an initial 179 new tankers valued at $35 billion.
Rep. Neil Abercrombie, a Hawaii Democrat who heads another subcommittee that oversees Air Force programs, says this may be the only practical way to break a political logjam.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has strongly opposed dividing the tanker acquisition, saying it would double combined development costs, to $14 billion.
Skelton, speaking at a defense-industry conference organized by Jane's, a publisher of military-related material, declined to discuss his personal stance on dividing the tanker buy. The issue is due to figure in debate on Obama's budget request for the 2010 fiscal year starting October 1. The detailed budget is due to be sent to Congress on Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at uk.reuters.com ...
Remember, Boeing's headquarters is in Chicago now.
Can't have those tankers built in a blue state like Alabama, huh?
Also, the Air Force did not factor in the cost of rebuilding hangers that are the wrong size.
The Air Force also did not factor in rebuilding runways that are the wrong size.
Also, MOST of the AIRBUS deal (very little done by Northrup) -— most of the Airbus deal would hire foreign workers.
Most of the Boeing deal would hire AMERICAN workers.
The tax revenue from the American workers should be considered as a REDUCTION in the cost of using Boeing.
You may be right. Murtha was in the tank for Boeing from the beginning then he came up with this split thing a few months ago to try to appease his cronies in the House after NG got the last bid.
Good post and the IG agrees with you.
Boeing “never” protests, except for this one time, and for good reason, from the info you listed, to the fact the tanker could not re-fuel all the jets the Air Force stated in the RFP, to violating rules by distributing a “fact sheet” to attendees at the AFA conference when the source selection was underway and no such activities/contacts were allowed by law.
Hope others are listening and learning.
Yes, congress has to pimp out this refule plane, :the “soul plane.”
You can too:
http://www.soulplane.com/main.php
Exactly...It would be a real can of worms plus the extra billions in cost now and the ongoing cost.
Great analysis! Airbus NEVER should have been considered as we were giving the Tanker contract to a foreign source.
One thing Boeing can build is wide bodied aircraft with their ton of experience not to mention they have experience with tankers.
NG cheating? No shock there!
Everything fatso does seems contrary to honesty and the best interests of the USA.
Exactly right, it's all political rather than buying the best plane for our fleet, though the Boeing drones on this board will say differently. The Northrop plane will be built in Alabama, not in France.......
“The Northrop plane will be ASSEMBLED in Alabama, not in France.......”
Fixed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.