Posted on 03/03/2008 6:41:55 PM PST by wolf78
WASHINGTON, March 3 (Reuters) - Details emerged on Monday about how dramatically Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) and its European partner beat Boeing Co (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) to win a $35 billion tanker aircraft competition, as furious Boeing supporters called the contract "a multibillion dollar gift to Europe."
"This was not a close outcome in any sense of the term," defense analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute told Reuters, describing how Boeing failed to beat Northrop in any of the key criteria for the aerial refueling contract.
"Northrop won decisively and completely," said Thompson, who has close ties to the Air Force.
[...]
In a report on Monday, Thompson wrote that Boeing matched the appeal of the Northrop bid only in the area of proposal risk. And that came only after Air Force reviewers pressed Boeing to stretch out its aggressive development schedule for a new version of its 767 jet, which added to the cost.
The Boeing proposal was initially rated "high-risk" because reviewers worried that Boeing's plan to build a new version of the 767 using parts from other versions would add to the cost.
Northrop proposed a tanker based on the Airbus A330 aircraft built by Europe's EADS (EAD.PA: Quote, Profile, Research). Northrop-EADS won in four of the five criteria set by the Air Force: mission capability, past performance, price, and an integrated fleet assessment, according to Thompson.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
I know nothing but I side with Boeing.....I think this is a handout for Europe. Refueling aircrafts are so complex Boeing can’t handle? Don’t buy that.
The fix was in and somebody got paid.
Glad we could give France a stimulus package.
Its just plain stupid to give military contracts to nations that fight us ebvery step of the way when it comes to war. We found that out when the Swiss simply refused to make components for missiles because they didn’t want them used in Iraq.
You said it.
Yes, that was Boeing several years back.
Well at least one of those countries has been supportive.
I work for Northrop and I side with Northop. Not that I'm biased or anything...
I think so, too. Boeing has too much history providing these type of aircraft.
Does not matter we do not need to give the french or anyone else who could be our adversary at a moments notice any of our military contracts.
It doesn't sound good for Boing. Higher costs, less delvered and poor prior performance. As much as I'd like to say always buy US ... doens't sound as though Boing could deliver the better quality and quantity for the price.
But I'm sure we'll hear more in the coming days.
According to many of the pilots who fly them and industry experts, the A320 is junk. If this deal gets approved, prepare to see a lot of dead AF air-to-air refueling crews.
I suppose you want them to buy American equipment without any reservations?
These are tankers, not weapons platforms. Actually, the KC-30 can work as a cargo plane and a passenger craft as well. Our Australian and British allies use the plane. The plane will be built in the U.S. It’s not a new aircraft design. And France is not our enemy—a troublesome ally, but never an enemy.
Personally I think the only factor should be which company can produce the better plane that fits the requirements. I don’t care which country in the world produces the plane. The military should get the finest available military equipment and if it is produced outside of the U.S., so be it.
I am personally more impressed with Grumman”s line of military aircraft over Boeing’s.
It was up for competitave bids. And this is Big world type politics. I hope Boeing didnt overprice the value of their patriotism.
Lately I am of the mind you are with us or against us. We have plenty of Americans who need the jobs here. The french can pound sand and eat cheese.
I heard an aerospace business analyst on the radio this morning going over the details of the deal. Boeing produces the same percentage of the plane in the USA as Northrup does: 60%. Even Boeing outsources the other 40% and brings the parts back in the USA for assembly.
Boeing got caught with its pants down, trying to cheat on the bidding process and so the government awarded this contract to Northrup specifically to punish Boeing. The planes are still being assembled in the USA, only that the assembly plant is in Alabama and the corporate offices for Northrup are in Southern California. On this deal, I have no sympathy at all for Boeing. Serves them right for being cheaters.
The 320’s record is good. but isn’t this based on the 330 ?
"Clearly the U.S. Air Force conducted a thorough and transparent competition in choosing their new tanker, which resulted in selection of the aircraft that best meets their current and future requirements," said Gary Ervin, corporate vice president and president of Northrop Grumman's Integrated Systems sector. "By selecting the most capable and modern aircraft, the Air Force has embraced a system that provides a best-value solution to our armed forces and our nation."
The KC-45A Tanker aircraft will be assembled at new, state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities in Mobile, Ala., and will employ 25,000 workers at 230 U.S. companies. The KC-45A's refueling systems will be built at new facilities in Bridgeport, W.Va., and delivered to the KC-45A Production Center for aircraft integration.
The KC-45A will be built by a world-class industrial team led by Northrop Grumman, and includes primary subcontractor EADS North America and General Electric Aviation, Sargent Fletcher, Honeywell, Parker, AAR Cargo Systems, Telephonics and Knight Aerospace.
Northrop Grumman Corporation is a $32 billion global defense and technology company whose 120,000 employees provide innovative systems, products, and solutions in information and services, electronics, aerospace and shipbuilding to government and commercial customers worldwide.
I’m hoping Congress steps in and stops this crap. Defense dollars need to stay home! Can’t do this with a US firm? Bunk! Build the capacity if you have to, even if it costs more. Oh, wait. We’ve got all these free trade agreements that give foreign firms equal (if not preferential) treatment for US contracts. Free trade? That’s what they call US jobs and cash flowing mostly overseas.
Parts of planes being built in China?
That would describe Boeing's planes.
I've heard that 777s take up too much ramp space, but always thought that was a BS argument.
Boeing got caught with its pants down, trying to cheat on the bidding process and so the government awarded this contract to Northrup specifically to punish Boeing. The planes are still being assembled in the USA, only that the assembly plant is in Alabama and the corporate offices for Northrup are in Southern California. On this deal, I have no sympathy at all for Boeing. Serves them right for being cheaters.
Thanks for one of only a few reasonable posts on this thread.
I think that past performance was one of the major factors. Boeing has got too much on it’s plate to handle the commercial orders they have and then add fifty more tankers into the mis and have them delivered by 2013. Airbus makes a good plane.
ruschpa: “The military should get the finest available military equipment and if it is produced outside of the U.S., so be it.”
That sounds really good on the face of it, but it’s not. If some other country can do it better, it’s time to build that defense capability in house. Sending contracts overseas only makes foreign industry stronger at our expense.
Heres some info on the the evil non-American manufacturing firm of Northop/Grumman.
http://www.nn.northropgrumman.com/bush/photo_gallery_island.html
I'm a little low on cash right now. As long as you're volunteering other people's tax dollars, can you just go ahead and cover my share as well as your own? Thanks.
“Northrop Grumman Corporation is a $32 billion global defense and technology company whose 120,000 employees provide innovative systems, products, and solutions in information and services, electronics, aerospace and shipbuilding to government and commercial customers worldwide.”
I’m glad Northrop has such pride in its “worldwide” customer base. Shame it isn’t prouder of its role in US defense. Would Northrop give foreign powers a leg up on the US for a buck? I hope not.
That is exactly what happened!
Northrop has nothing in this except for a their name. EADS/Airbus is building the plane. IOW; it’s not their product. I wish it were, I really do.
NittanyLion: “I’m a little low on cash right now. As long as you’re volunteering other people’s tax dollars, can you just go ahead and cover my share as well as your own?”
This ain’t a DVD player from China. It’s a DEFENSE contract. Get it?
As long as we're talking about customer base, how do like this claim from Boeing's website:
Boeing has customers in more than 90 countries around the world and is one of the largest U.S. exporters in terms of sales.
I certainly do. That's why the experts should pick the best equipment available to the military - not award bids to American products even when their design and/or delivery is inferior to what's available elsewhere.
Yeah, I know what you mean.
Northrop/Grumman aint got nuthin!
Its all just the Frogs taking U.S tax dollars via some grand conspiracy.
http://www.atoz.northropgrumman.com/Automated/AtoZ/A.html
Believe me, I know firsthand that Northrop is and has done a lot for the US defense industry. I just don’t think major defense contracts should be awarded to foreign powers or the companies that work with them. If some other country has a better product, fine. That only means it’s time for a US firm to learn to do it even better, even if it costs more in the short term. What some of the posters here don’t seem to understand is that technology isn’t just one contract. Each and every project builds a corporation’s knowledge base. We are building up foreign companies on defense projects at the expense of our own country, and that’s just plain dumb.
Think about history. You don’t increase another nation’s defense industries at the expense of your own. In the short term we might get a better tanker, but in the long term we lose. We lose the knowledge they’ll gain when they build those tankers, and we lose all the years of follow on contracts and support that comes with it.
“Boeing has customers in more than 90 countries around the world and is one of the largest U.S. exporters in terms of sales.”
Commercial aircraft are one thing. Defense aircraft, like tankers, are something else.
Why isn't he flaunting the fact the now there will be a big 'net loss' of jobs here...while we reward a consortium which includes the country that would NOT EVEN LET OUR TANKERS USE THEIR AIRSPACE DURING OUR AIRSTRIKES ON LIBYA!!!
It's bad enough to outsource some of the best, high-paying jobs around....but to send many of them to FRANCE IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.