VIDEO: EADS announced KC-X tanker bid

, , , ,

18 Responses to VIDEO: EADS announced KC-X tanker bid

  1. Robert 20 April, 2010 at 11:01 pm #

    Courageous. Best of wishes.

  2. jetcal1 21 April, 2010 at 4:12 pm #

    Interesting to see they brought in Vought. I wonder how much of the structure sub-contracting business goes to Triumphs Mexican structure facility.

  3. JayJay 21 April, 2010 at 4:13 pm #

    They have the best plane, they would create thousands of jobs in the US, but they may loose the contract for political reasons. What a pity!

  4. Jason 21 April, 2010 at 4:42 pm #

    They have the larger plane, making it the more capable plane, which makes it the more costlier plane, but may lose because the taxpayer shouldn’t pay for capabilities not needed.

    The US isn’t some small European country. We don’t need a big airframe to fulfill multiple capabilites (tanking, cargo, transport). At least, not in larger numbers. We have hundreds of “C” aircarft for those roles. We need a tanker first and foremost at the best price with lowest costs.

  5. aeroxavier 21 April, 2010 at 5:18 pm #

    yeah , yeah the argument of job for give the contract to boeing was not true.all plane was make by american people in USA, no one european was concerned.
    USA have give the model of capitalism with great international enterprise, but when this is foreign enterprise who can win , that change.
    when one mc donald was make in pakistan, that was not american who was going work in.
    we can see what american will defend, their own interest

  6. jetcal1 22 April, 2010 at 2:59 pm #

    “we can see what american will defend, their own interest”

    That is a very unique criticism. You seem to be confusing capitalism versus defense needs.

    May i suggest you look at why Sweden developed their own Aerospace industry?

  7. JayJay 22 April, 2010 at 5:14 pm #

    Thank you for the “small European country”. In terms of disdain and contempt, you are really big, for sure. For everything else…

  8. aeroxavier 22 April, 2010 at 5:21 pm #

    see US arms export and see if they don’t make capitalism. everybody need buy US stuff nobody need make their own military stuff. this is the objective of american for the rest of the world(europe) .USA have destroyed european defense industry but french have make one resistance in air sector (airbus, dassault , eurocopter ) and USA will destroy that, everywhere who one of this industry was involved, USA make all of possible to win the contract.

  9. jetcal1 22 April, 2010 at 5:23 pm #

    That may have been a very poorly phrased comment from Jason and nothing more.

    As far as politcal reasons, why not? I could certainly point to the A400M and would have proof in the engine selection alone.

    However, the U.S has purchased the C-27, CN-235 and the UH-72 and those are the first ones that come to mind.

    Each country looks out for it’s best interests. This not a commerical purchase. I do not expect your government or mine to buy a product merely to curry some politcal favor.

  10. Herkeng130 22 April, 2010 at 5:46 pm #

    They should wait for KC-Y, too large for KC-X.

  11. jetcal1 22 April, 2010 at 6:32 pm #

    Ahh, someone who remembers!

  12. jetcal1 23 April, 2010 at 2:54 pm #

    You are somewhat mistaken in your views my friend.
    The Europeans bought from the U.S. for several reasons;
    1. Their industries needed to be rebuilt and reconstituted after WWII (Except for some notable exceptions in France.)
    2. Buying from the U.S brought their units costs down as this equipment was already in production in the U.S.
    3. Many countries were still recovering economically after WWII and could afford to reconstitute their military with out U.S. MAP funds.
    4. Until EADS there was no unified and efficient weapons production within Europe unless they were building U.S. product under license
    5. Now that the industry is established and general quantities are low, Europe is now competitive with the U.S. And it only took 45 years after WWII.
    You also very conveniently forget about the G222 and Fiat G91 which were developed for use by NATO with U.S. funding. I may be wrong, but I also think SEPECAT also got funding for the Jaguar from the U.S.

    Oh and by the way, the object of business is to become dominant. You are seeking this for Europe but complain about the U.S. doing it.

    You remind me of the French pulling out of the Thompson Air Races in the ’30′s. The Americans complained that the French were getting government funding for their aircraft. (True)
    The French complained the Americans were getting their engines given to them by the engine manufacturers. (True)

    The difference was the engine manufacturers ate the cost of developing those engines and giving them to the racers. They did not get paid by the government. Sounds like some things never really change my friend.

  13. JayJay 23 April, 2010 at 4:52 pm #

    One doesn’t have to mix everything : this is one thing to take political decisions (for example : A400M, Rafale), once this is assumed and clearly stated, and this is another to say : “Come on and bid, it will be a fair process” and when the French win, to say “Oops, excuse us, we have to change the RFP!” and I guess they will do it again and again until Boeing wins…

  14. jetcal1 23 April, 2010 at 5:02 pm #

    Please go back and read the report where they tossed out the winning bid. Right or wrong EADS was given information that Boeing was not. There were severe issues with the the way the USAF handled the proposals from both Boeing and EADS.

    I really don’t care who wins the contract.

    But if I were an Airbus assembly worker, I would be looking very carefully at this.
    I worked for a German Aerospace company in Texas several years ago, Our overhead was less and our quality was better. The company shut down lines in Germany, expanded the plant in Texas to ten lines and then moved other lines to Poland.
    I think they only kept some manufacturing in Germany.

    Assembly has been moved out of Germany.

    Shareholder value you know.

  15. jetcal1 23 April, 2010 at 5:10 pm #

    aero, jay
    Here is grear article on what the KC-X has turned into.

    It is to bad the Air Force mistakes have turned into this.

  16. JayJay 26 April, 2010 at 10:35 am #

    Thanks jetcal for the very interesting article

  17. jetcal1 26 April, 2010 at 4:35 pm #

    It will be interesting if EADS gets the contract. Assembly lines closed in France and Vought subcontracting working to Mexico.
    Senator Shelby will be seen as as the biggest loser. The Boeing folks will crow loudly and we still won’t know if we got the best aircraft for years afterward.

  18. janitorial cleaning 9 July, 2010 at 2:12 pm #

    Good post, thanks

Leave a Reply