I know, but it passes the time.
Posted on 07/09/2008 12:15:52 PM PDT by jazusamo
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced Wednesday that Northrop Grumman and Boeing will have to submit revised proposals for the Air Force’s highly contested aerial refueling tanker program.
The Pentagon chief's decision comes after the Government Accountability Office (GAO) upheld Boeing's protest of the Air Force's decision to award the contract to Northrop Grumman and EADS North America, the parent company of Boeing rival Airbus.
“I have concluded that the contract cannot be awarded,” Gates said at a Pentagon news conference. Northrop Grumman won the heated competition on Feb. 29, but is currently under a stop-work order.
The decision means Boeing could win the contract. After it lost the initial decision, it opened a risky lobbying and public relations battle against the Air Force’s decision in the hope of overturning it.
The Pentagon had 60 days to decide how to heed the GAO's recommendations, but intense pressure from Capitol Hill likely sped up the decision by several weeks. Congress is to hear testimony on the GAO report on Thursday.
Boeing's congressional supporters used the GAO's ruling to push the Pentagon to reopen the competition. In its report, GAO said the Air Force made "significant errors" in its selection process.
Gates said John Young, the Pentagon's top weapons buyer and a former Senate Appropriations Defense staff member, would be in charge of the tanker selection. Air Force officials were in charge when the contract was awarded to Northrop Grumman.
The Air Force will still be in charge of the program once a contractor is selected, Gates said.
Young said that the Pentagon will issue a draft request for proposals that will address all of the GAO's findings. The Pentagon is not starting the competition from scratch but is asking the bidders to modify their proposals to address the GAO concerns. Young stressed that he wanted to see as few areas as possible changed in the request for proposals.
The Pentagon will issue the draft request at the end of the month or the beginning of August. Young expects to select the winner by the end of the year.
Young was not clear how the Pentagon will handle the fact that a contract already was signed with Northrop.
Gates said that he hoped the Pentagon's way forward on the tanker program would restore confidence among lawmakers who have been increasingly critical of the Air Force's ability to select a new tanker — the service's No. 1 priority.
That’s another good article. I identify with the overall tone of the comments given. It seems to me any loyal U.S. citizen would find themselves sympathetic to these views, yet I am amazed at the folks who seem compelled to front for the EADS group.
I hadn’t realized Russian involvement before I read your first post. That’s rather amazing.
I know, but it passes the time.
EADS isn't moving anything here. They are setting up a final assembly line here (using $250M in Katrina money BTW).
They will still produce A330s the way they always have.
If you think a large number of jobs are moving from Europe to Alabama then you seriously underestimate the strength of the unions over there.
They have already had wild cat strikes over plans to sell some factories.
Why do you think top French and German diplomats are lobbying Bush? To lose jobs?
Tankers sold to other countries will not be built here (check out euro tanker).
You don’t seem to understand what subsidy means, so it is really silly arguing with you about it (not surprising for an Airbus supporter)
Great fashion advice on pants now 
I’ll take the Boeing as most people in the Air Force would Over a EADS P.O.S. anyday.
Built to last by Boeing.
1, It is future orders that are in the balance (But that will only be a couple of dozen at most)
2. And the real prize is the A330-200F commercial freighter production. EADS wants to move that out of the Euro zone to make it more competitive. European governments accept that as it means a smaller share of a much bigger program.
It's be a net advantage to the US economy because it would mean both Boring and Airbus freighters would be US built.
The only one with their nose out of joint would be Boeing, as they would face stronger competition.
So they are fighting to preserve market share, even though it disadvantages the USA as a whole.
The only mystery is why supposedly patriotic Americans are prepared to disadvantage the US to support Boeing corporate welfare.
The only mystery is why supposedly patriotic Americans are prepared to disadvantage the US to support Boeing corporate welfare.
How do you get Corporate welfare out of a Military contract. There is no SUBSIDY unlike the EADS bird.
BOEING DOES NOT RECEIVE SUBSIDIES, NO WELFARE. No startup loans not repaid no Countries bailing them out with Government LOANS.
The EADS A330 Will only be ASSEMBLED her if you are lucky. The current list of sub contractors currently build parts for EADS. no change there except the addition of the wing pod refueling equip everything else is built in France, UK and Germany. (wings, fuselage, tail)
The KC-767 has more than 80% AMERICAN PART MADE IN THE USA.
Got read airframers for a break down on both planes.
EADS will not build them here they might get assembled but don’t hold your breath too long.
So once again, how could a NON-EXISTANT aircraft be better than one that is not only flying but has successfully transferred fuel in flight BEFORE the Air Force made it's decision?
Oh and about your beloved general handy......
It seems that in 2005, he was saying that the Air Force needed a bigger tanker:
“In my humble opinion, the greatest need is a little more strategic-capable aircraft...I'm saying that the need is more in the KC-10-like aircraft.” -General Handy in Aerospace Daily and Defense Report, August 3, 2005
In the article, Handy believed the best way forward with new tankers was “supplementing its large-tanker fleet” because each of those aircraft “carries almost twice as much fuel as a KC-135,”.
It's amazing as to how far a Boeing paycheck can go in changing one's own opinion isn't it?
Oh and the hypocrisy of your beloved Boeing and their paid attack dogs bellyaching about jobs lost:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/07/irony-or-farce-boeing-ships-us.html
It seems that Boeing has no problem with shipping American jobs overseas.
“Wrong THe KC-30 CANNOT refuel the V-22”
Neither can the KC-767AT due to the slower speed of the V-22.
The ONLY aircraft in the inventory that IS certified to refuel the V-22 is the KC-130.....That is even something that a know-it-all such as yourself should know.
The fact is Boeing has never demonstrated that a KC-767 can refuel an Osprey.
“Read the Tanker blogs plenty of aircrews.”
Oh wow tanker blogs.....Maybe I can sign up and pretend like I’m part of an aircrew too.
The article is irrelevant since the A400 has been rolled out and will be conducting it’s first flight this year per the agreement.
Let’s see....
Agreement signed in 2003 calling for first flight in 2008.
Last I checked we’re still in 2008.
“Unlike your EADS NG posts. I have showed links.”
No you havn’t.
Where are the links to these supposed blogs by tanker aircrews claiming that they will not fly the Northrop Grumman jet?
Where are the links showing FAA certification of the KC-767AT?
Where are the links showing the first flight of the KC-767AT?
Where were the links to that Boeing propaganda you were spewing word for word?
“No links.”
Like you should talk since there isn’t a single link in your long winded post.
“What country do you come from...or more importanly...work for nowadays? You come across as a mercenary for hire. Not a patriot.”
So I’m not a patriot because I’m not supporting Boeing’s corruption in their push to saddle the Air Force with an OBSOLETE aircraft that barely has the same capability of the KC-135 it’s supposed to replace?
And that doesn’t even include their exporting of American jobs to china, Korea, Italy, Japan, etc.
And speaking of patriotism, here is Boeing showing theirs:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/07/irony-or-farce-boeing-ships-us.html
Yeah how patriotic of them to low ball a bid and then F American workers over by exporting the job to Korea......Oh the irony of Boeing’s claims.
I’m sure that you will ignore that article too just like you ignore the fact that Boeing will construct parts of the KC-767AT in communist china, as well as communist aligned union controlled factories in Italy, etc.
Just like you ignore all the other relevant facts in this case.
“First, let’s take a look at the guy you communists are disparaging.”
Oh, so now I’m a communist? ROFLMAO!!
You can’t refute a single thing I have said, so you launch personal attacks by alluding that I’m some sort of traitor, that I’m not a patriot, that I’m a communist, that I’m anti-American to include a swipe at my military service.
Funny you claim that I’m part of the “Loony Left”, when it is you yourself who has resorted to using their own tactics.
But hey if you enjoy being aligned with the likes of john murtha, patty murray and others with “D” next to their names then so be it.
The hypocrisy of you koolaid drinking Boeing cheerleaders reaches new depths each day since you don’t whine about the military purchasing foreign equipment in the past to include the C-27J, MH-68, HH-65, UH-72, RG-31 MRAP, RG-33 MRAP, and the Stryker IAV.
“must then be admitting you are bested.”
By who you?
Funny but I’m not the one using personal attacks as you did in your above post.
And you once again overlook the FACT that Boeing is going to have components of the KC-767 manufactured in CHINA as well as communist controlled factories in Italy.
“Perhaps you didn’t know that EADs is now admitting that 90% of the parts of the tanker would be made in Europe?”
There a link or is that something you pulled out of thin air?
More than likely you pulled it out of thin air since the tankers built for Australia, United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia will be made with 90% european parts.
But by all means don’t stop your lies and exaggerations.
John Bolton is a great guy, but he’s only telling half the story not surprising since the firm he works for represents Boeing.
What about all those parts that Boeing uses that are produced in China, Japan, Italy, etc? What about Boeing’s contract with a russian company for titanium forgings?
What happens if we have a falling out with anyone or several of those countries?
Funny how all you Boeing cheerleaders slam NG-EADS for the same things that your own beloved Boeing does.
“how was it that EADs was allowed to participate let alone win?”
Because since Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas there is NO OTHER MANUFACTURER in the U.S. that could build a commercial based tanker platform. In other words Boeing has a monopoly, and when you have a monopoly there is no competition.
I see you still post articles that ignore facts, or tell half truths.
Throughout the process, Boeing was praising the Air Force for the transparent and fair process then when they find out that they lost, they whine about the process being changed. If it was being changed in “mid-course” as Boeing claimed, then why did they wait until after they lost?
According to the RFP, there was no restrictions on size, and it clearly stated that the aircraft had to meet or EXCEED the minimum requirement.
The NG/EADS jet has an offload rate of 1200gpm through the boom, as opposed to the 900gpm from Boeing.
The NG/EADS jet can offload more fuel at 1000nm than the Boeing jet (153,000lbs compared to Boeings 117,000lbs)
The NG/EADS jet is 6% more fuel efficent than the Boeing jet.
The NG/EADS jet carried 43,000lbs more fuel than the Boeing jet, and the Boeing jet only carries 2,000lbs more fuel than the jet it’s supposed to replace.
The NG/EADS jet has a longer range than the Boeing jet.
The NG/EADS jet can carry more cargo and troops than the Boeing jet.
The NG/EADS jet can take off and land on shorter runways than the Boeing jet.
Too bad that you can’t see the facts of this issue beyond the tip of your nose
ROFL.
YAWN.
That all you got? Oh wait you support Boeing....Never mind.
“Built to last by Boeing”
Yeah just like the flying Edsel AKA Pinto of the skies AKA The Marine Corps Lawn Dart.....V-22 Osprey.
Thank you.
He is a good man that the Air Force (and this nation) need in times like these.
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.