Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jazusamo
Good comments so far.

I'd change the article to read:
"Northrop executives concluded the risk attached to a fixed price contract precluded a low bid, without which they felt they could not win against Boeing which, however, Boeing is desperate enough to propose."

Union pressure?
Their unions have not been known for doing Boeing any favors and were probably even worse under MDC.

Another RFP because of a single bid?
It's called "attempted competition" and can go ahead with heavy handed price & cost analysis (throat cutting) because there is no competition available.
[Although I can imagine His Greatness announcing a do over just to prove that he is saving taxpayer's money - and driving costs into the next guy's administration]

Besides, the USG has already screwed this procurement up at least twice [recognizing some bone headed stupidity on the part of Boeing and one government employee] so that we are already way late to the game and those fifties era KC's aren't getting any younger.

25 posted on 03/08/2010 12:00:49 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: norton

Absolutely! They need to get on with it and start delivering new tankers to the AF. Though I live in WA I haven’t taken sides in this ongoing fiasco but haven’t liked the idea of EADS supplying us.

Boeing stuck it to the unions on the plant in SC for the second 787 line and the unions got just what they deserved. The Dem controlled state of WA was more or less in cahoots with the unions and Boeing stung them both.


28 posted on 03/08/2010 12:09:40 PM PST by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson