While we're all waiting for Northrop Grumman to decide whether it wants to play, let's consider what could happen if they don't submit a bid for the $35 billion tanker contract.
In the absence of a Northrop-led proposal, what would stop EADS North America from submitting its own bid for the KC-X deal?
I can think of reasons why they would. If price is such a factor in the competition, cutting out the US flag bearer and bringing systems integration in-house might save some money. EADS NA has demonstrated it can win an aircraft contract from the US military. The 100th UH-72 Lakota for the US Army rolls off the assembly line in Mississippi next week. The company believes its solid performance on LUH allows it to compete on fair terms with American-owned companies for other Pentagon contracts.
On the other hand, there's no question EADS' chances of victory are smaller without Northrop's help. Northrop has powerful friends on Capitol Hill and a long relationship with the customer. Moreover, as long as fuel offload requirements for the next tanker are modeled on the KC-135R, the KC-45 is going to be disadvantaged against a smaller aircraft like the Boeing 767. And let's be honest: The UH-72, despite its success, is not a widebody tanker; it's a civilian airspace-only light utility helicopter.
EADS NA is not ready yet to even acknowledge whether their teaming agreement with Northrop would preclude a standalone bid, as I asked them earlier today. EADS' spokesman replied: "EADS North America is committed, under the team leadership of Northrop Grumman, to provide the most capable tanker to theUS
But I think it's still a fair question. Why not?
In the absence of a Northrop-led proposal, what would stop EADS North America from submitting its own bid for the KC-X deal?
I can think of reasons why they would. If price is such a factor in the competition, cutting out the US flag bearer and bringing systems integration in-house might save some money. EADS NA has demonstrated it can win an aircraft contract from the US military. The 100th UH-72 Lakota for the US Army rolls off the assembly line in Mississippi next week. The company believes its solid performance on LUH allows it to compete on fair terms with American-owned companies for other Pentagon contracts.
On the other hand, there's no question EADS' chances of victory are smaller without Northrop's help. Northrop has powerful friends on Capitol Hill and a long relationship with the customer. Moreover, as long as fuel offload requirements for the next tanker are modeled on the KC-135R, the KC-45 is going to be disadvantaged against a smaller aircraft like the Boeing 767. And let's be honest: The UH-72, despite its success, is not a widebody tanker; it's a civilian airspace-only light utility helicopter.
EADS NA is not ready yet to even acknowledge whether their teaming agreement with Northrop would preclude a standalone bid, as I asked them earlier today. EADS' spokesman replied: "EADS North America is committed, under the team leadership of Northrop Grumman, to provide the most capable tanker to the
But I think it's still a fair question. Why not?
Recent Comments