Posted on 03/04/2011 9:54:55 AM PST by Yo-Yo
Are you saying these honorable men should not retire someday and use their expertise?
Their experience makes them marketable across the broad-spectrum of DoD acquisitions.
Or are you insulting the honor and integrity of the Air Force officers involved in the selection?
Good! I wish all contracts were the same, common sense tells me that much money is wasted on costs+plus.
The bid was not from “French EADS”. It was from EADS North America. There are very strict DoD rules requiring separation between EADS NA and the European parent company. There is no interference allowed, and tight restrictions on the information and decision making that can occur between the companies. Obviously the DoD would not have allowed EADS NA to bid on the contract if that were not the case. Go peddle your misinformation (and xenophobia) elsewhere.
Nonsense.
My comment was a response to a poster who was talking about McCain and the history of the tanker bids.
It's clear that you were in error to make the assumption that you did.
“I understand that a split order was not on the table but I think that it should have been considered.”
From what I heard it was considered, it was determined not to be acceptable.
Boeing is too big to fail.
I guess EADS earns more money today with A330 then they expected back in 2008 due to 787 delays. Airbus wants to raise production to 10 aircraft a month in 2013. Maybe with another line in Alabama.
On the other side Boeing wants to raise capacity up to 2 aircraft a month and is looking for intermediate costumers to sell some 767 (Maybe UPS – 767-400F?) to keep the line busy until tanker production starts.
An interim solution could be to rent some tankers from Air Tanker Ltd, the UAE, Australia or Saudi Arabia.
In case of a tanker shortage (KC-135 problems) EADS won’t be able to provide an aircraft fulfilling all requirements set up for contest won by Boeing today. But EADS can offer a tanker with airlift capacity. The tanker will probably lack network capability and other special features. It'll depend on the price to get some civil A330 from production line.
100%. Everyone (Air Force, taxpayer) got screwed on this deal.
Parts to be manufactured in france. Truth.
French having inordinate control over a US national security asset. Truth.
Just who is spewing misinformation?
And it is not xenophobic to detest the cheese-eating surrender monkeys. It is delusional to defend them.
>>>>Is this a scam to underbid and then triple the price?<<<<
Yes
“THE” competition? You were using the singular “the” and this means you were clearly referring to one bid, only, and not the “history” of the competition. As we all know, there was the original lease, the past bid and the current bid. That is a "history." Since this thread is about the current bid, you obviously meant this current bid when you clearly stated "the" in a singular context, and if not, you were unclear. Don't worry. It happens.
Have a nice day.
Excellent post.
Recall the original F-14 Tomcat contract, which was FFP and ended up with Grumman taking a loss on every aircraft. The only reason why Grumman didn’t go bankrupt was that the Shah of Iran bought 80 at a substantial markup.
Parts to be manufactured in france
So what? Both companies (EADS NA and Boeing) would have substantial content produced in other countries. To pretend like that's some kind of reason to disqualify a bidder is ludicrous. You'd have to disqualify both companies if that was the case.
French having inordinate control over a US national security asset.
That is a false statement as I have already explained several times.
Just who is spewing misinformation?
YOU!!
And it is not xenophobic to detest the cheese-eating surrender monkeys. It is delusional to defend them
There you go again, insulting all French people in the world. That makes it plain for everyone to see how juvenile you are, and thus should not be taken seriously.
” So it doesn’t matter where the parent company is based...EADS NA is a US company. “
By paper filing, not by practice. It is a fraud in my opinion, just like those “women and minority owned” businesses where one person that happens to be black is listed as an executive but the company is owned by someone else.
WRONG! You apparently didn't comprehend what I said. The DoD requires strict separation between EADS and EADS NA. EADS NA is for all intents and purposes completely separate from EADS as far as the DoD is concerned, and is a US company. If you don't like that, take it up with the DoD...they will also vehemently disagree with you.
Not insulting them, but I’ve seen how some of these double dippers come waltzing into the private sector thinking they are the only one knowing anything. There are people out there that have built their lives learning their craft in this business only to get passed over by some ring knocker. And say not Boeing, as I recall, for the first attempt to secure a deal for these tankers, a couple of gov’t officials got jail time for their backroom deals for high level jobs with Boing Boing.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it meansParent company is in france. Truth.
NetherlandsParts to be manufactured in france. Truth.
UK, Germany, Spain are the major producersFrench having inordinate control over a US national security asset. Truth.
They don't control, they don't make the main parts, and for the US Tanker order, they wouldn't assemble or add the milspec equipment, that would have been Mobile, AlabamaJust who is spewing misinformation?
And it is not xenophobic to detest the cheese-eating surrender monkeys.
Yes in this case it is, and a pretty chronic case too
Really? Do you wanna tell me what this is? Introducing the Italian Air Force Boeing KC-767A. The link has pictures of it landing.
It is not the same plane.
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.