It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

rumour milll - tanker contract

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
ok no link im afraid - but really hot off the press - , the USAF tanker contract is going to be 1 `lot` and a spilt bid - both boeing and airbus getting aircraft - and no second round , what will happen is both companies get the entire replacement contract , but split over several years , with boeing getting the 767 model and airbus the A330 - so a case of both win *something*




posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   
But does that provide enough work for N-G and EADS to justify the Mobile facility?

*nb; Mobile is a place in Alabama, its not a factory that moves around



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
*nb; Mobile is a place in Alabama, its not a factory that moves around




Now, besides the logistical, educational, and financial etc... issues with maintaining several different aircraft for the same role this sets a very bad precedent if indeed it comes to pass. Essentially complain loudly enough and cause enough of a political/legal mess to get your way. I never thought I'd say this but the M.I.C. has really shown its true face and influence. What happened to the good old days where no reason was even needed? What the brass liked was ordered on the spot and that was that.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Essentially complain loudly enough and cause enough of a political/legal mess to get your way.



Ironically the Airbus deal is undoubtedly better for the American aerospace industry in the long term.



But since Boeing are based in Seattle, and Airbus in pesky France - its an easy perception to get across to more ignorant members of society that its American tax dollars paying someone else to do work.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
Ironically the Airbus deal is undoubtedly better for the American aerospace industry in the long term.


That should not even be the primary concern, it might be counter intuitive for the bean pushers and talking suits but the USAF is the primary issue. They need a tanker to replace the decades old fleet which will cause problems due to their age and availability/capability as the years go on. Of course two competing designs will have overlapping and unique strong/weak points but in the end only one can win. As such, the winner being the Airbus/NG design that's the one that should be in the process of being built right now.

Sure the YF-23 had it's selling points and capabilities, so did the YF-22, in the end the USAF chose one, the companies involved made their peace and went on. Of course an argument cold be made for the YF-23 (and it still is) but debate without progress and further delay is unacceptable. We'd still be debating who to award the contract to, even as Eagles fell from the sky, and they have.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join