Recommended Posts
kallend 1,679
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
piper17 1
The other interesting thing is Congress, in their writing of the "Buy American" legislation plus other acts, defined various European (and other) countries as fitting into the "Buy American" category including France, Germany, Spain, UK, Turkey, Egypt, Norway etc. So it seems like Congress and Boeing got bit by past ill-conceived congressional legislation. Because of this act, the Airbus is just as American as the Boeing 767.
mnealtx 0
Quote
No no no! You got it ALL WRONG. The entitlement culture is found among poor undeserving people, not big corporations with fat-cat bosses. Just ask mnealtx, he'll tell you.
And evidently cluelessness is propagated from college campuses...
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
PhreeZone 15
I watched the hearings for about an hour an a half last night. From the sounds of it the request went through several draft peroids where the Air Force was scoping out the requirements and in some instances the requirements shifted towards the AirBus platform but it seems at some point some of the requirements shifted towards Boeing too. It sounds like the Air Force followed DOD and US Law in putting the primary contractors on equal ground and were right in ignoring the "impact to the industrial base" but now every one wants to get a piece of this money and screw what the end product is as long as its "Made in America"
Congress is going to piss off either Boeing and will probally cost Norm Dicks his seat in Congress if he fails to keep those people employed or its going to cost Alabama its reps since they will lose all those jobs for their state. Either way the Air Force loses since this is delaying the start of the production of the tankers and it will probally need to spend a ton more money to figure out who will get the contract in the end.
I see Boeing since too many people want to stick it to the French and our other NATO allies to keep the money in their district.
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
BillyVance 34
QuoteBoeing has a pathetic entitlement culture, all the way down from the boardroom to the union labor force on the floor. Nobody wants to do anything that "isn't their job", they just believe heart & soul that the world owes them a living.
That's what I believe too. Hey I worked for Boeing in the past too, in the Space and Defense Group, at the facility that designed the International Space Station. Boeing is a giant company, much much bigger than just one aircraft line. They can suck it up and try harder next time.
QuoteSince P&W is not supplying the engines for this aircraft, who is? My guess is GE, a US company.
Also, regarding spare parts for the future - next 30-50 years. These will probably be manufactured in the US by the lowest bidder. This is HUGE business. Either the Air Force will get the drawings for US manufacturers to quote on or US companies will reverse-engineer the various spare parts. I wouldn't think that spares will be coming from Europe unless the part is propietary.
reverse engineering in aerospace???
.
.
Also in case you jump a sport rig!!!
PhreeZone 15
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
kallend 1,679
QuoteQuote
No no no! You got it ALL WRONG. The entitlement culture is found among poor undeserving people, not big corporations with fat-cat bosses. Just ask mnealtx, he'll tell you.
And evidently cluelessness is propagated from college campuses...
That was pretty lame. Here, try again. I'll give you a free shot
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
tbrown 26
It's been an increasingly common practice in aerospace to buy parts from the countries you're trying to sell planes too. Boeing's been doing it for years, with wings and other whole sub assemblies for their jets being built in Japan, Italy, and other countries. That's how they've always explained their job offloads and their whole new "global" identity.
Northrop/Grumman is essentially doing the same thing, only taking it much further with EADS as a partner. N/G is not only buying their parts from the Euros, they're building a Euro airplane with Euro parts, only doing it inside the US.
They're not the perfect setup either, EADS has all kinds of problems. the French and Germans are so mistrustful of each other that Airbus has two parallel sets of managers to keep everybody's national pride in joint. It's a system that's designed to fail. N/G should have all kinds of fun working with them on a real airplane.
Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !
piper17 1
One area of great concern is that the Airbus design is way behind schedule in delivering tankers to another country...Australia, I think. They haven't, apparently, ever built tanker aircraft before and there may be issues with the refueling boom system. I wasn't able to watch enough of the testimony this morning (had to get to the gym, then work) to thoroughly understand the issue(s) but the last thing the USAF needs right now if further delays in replacing their elderly KC-135s.
Gawain 0
QuoteThey're not the perfect setup either, EADS has all kinds of problems. the French and Germans are so mistrustful of each other that Airbus has two parallel sets of managers to keep everybody's national pride in joint. It's a system that's designed to fail. N/G should have all kinds of fun working with them on a real airplane.
EADS has had countless cancellations of orders from the A380 due to the supply mangement.
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
PhreeZone 15
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
QuoteEngines are to be Rolls-Royce built out of the UK or France.
Are you sure? I just looked up 3 different articles and they all said the CF-6 will be the power.
PhreeZone 15
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
ypelchat 0
QuoteThe reference to GE- Ohio is that GE has a huge presense in the Cinci area, an area that borders David Hobson's district. Hobson's district includes Wright-Patterson AFB and would benifit indirectly if GE was the contractor on the engines but the Airbus platform has never been certified with the GE engines so he has no stake in Airbus getting it. If Boeing wins then GE does have a stake in the game and he stands to win too.
Incorrect. A simple google search.
http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/cf6/cf6_20021206.html
The A330 can also be powered with Pratt & Whitney engines, as well as Rolls-Royce engines.
http://www.pratt-whitney.com/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2e35288d1c83c010VgnVCM1000000881000aRCRD&prid=eb0f58cb36e28110VgnVCM100000c45a529f____
http://civil.rolls-royce.com/jet-engines-for-the-Airbus-A330/
I can assure you that the KC-45 is going to be a damn good tanker for the USAF, since it can pass all its fuel, and then fly for 20 more minutes, with both engines out, and then land safely.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Transat_Flight_236
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or40TLiP30Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIcOcM8Hk40&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cFhw-GlHQk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVyEXV8xvCs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOs57rNqbm8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHww6JiG4no&feature=related
Yves.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080618/ap_on_bi_ge/boeing_tanker_fight
QuoteThe Government Accountability Office upheld Boeing's protest of the refueling tanker contract and recommended the service hold a new competition. The congressional watchdog said it found "a number of significant errors" in the Air Force's February decision, including its failure to fairly judge the relative merits of each proposal.
While the GAO decision is not binding, it puts tremendous pressure on the Air Force to reopen the contract...
My wife is hotter than your wife.
DougH 270
=P
Sen. Clinton is on the Senate Armed Services Committee too.
My understanding from what I read was that Boeing was prepared to do that, but there was some kind of indication that the 767 series jet was more suitable to the specs.
As to the rest of your post, I agree to an extent. Boeing did as much to f*ck this up as anything...directly. However, it's also a 50+ year relationship. I think the USAF threw the baby out with the bathwater in a knee-jerk attempt to appear on the up-n-up with this announcement.
Despite the net-loss of jobs if the contract remains with Northrup/EADS, it will be a pretty good development for Alabama.
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites