Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pentagon to extend bidding deadline for $35B tanker contract
The Hill ^ | March 31, 2010 | Roxana Tiron

Posted on 03/31/2010 4:26:43 PM PDT by jazusamo

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 03/31/2010 4:26:43 PM PDT by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Really bending over backwards to make sure a non-US company wins this contract, ain’t he?


2 posted on 03/31/2010 4:29:52 PM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

Obama surely is, his meeting with Sarkozy yesterday and this being announced today is astounding.


3 posted on 03/31/2010 4:32:33 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
EADS North America isn't going to Bid...They had no plans to bid...Why should they? Boeing is going to win no matter what. This is just a show and a joke. The Pentagon desperately needs a second bid to claim the whole process was fair.

I do work in the Defense industry and my Company has interest in this contract.


4 posted on 03/31/2010 4:33:41 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

bump


5 posted on 03/31/2010 4:34:18 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
See my post on 4...


6 posted on 03/31/2010 4:34:31 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

If it’s not Boeing we’re not going.


7 posted on 03/31/2010 4:35:51 PM PDT by BulletBobCo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

I have not taken sides on this even though I live in WA. The entire process has been a fiasco with plenty of blame to go to all involved. The Air Force needs tankers and for EADS to step in now is unbelievable to me.


8 posted on 03/31/2010 4:39:54 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Maybe if Obama keeps fiddling around long enough, he can just cancel the whole thing. Why do we need refueling tankers when he’s planning to eliminate our bombers and fighters?


9 posted on 03/31/2010 4:42:58 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
The Air Force needs tankers and for EADS to step in now is unbelievable to me.

From the reports I've been seeing the Air Force has been begging them to bid in a CYOA move...I hate to see this because I retired from the Air Force...Boeing has this contract in the bag already just going through the motion.

No matter what happens the next taker will be a Boeing even if it built in China...


10 posted on 03/31/2010 4:45:10 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

You’re correct, doing away with refueling tankers would go a long way in dismantling our military which looks like he’s determined to do.


11 posted on 03/31/2010 4:45:34 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

I tend to agree with you, I just wish they’d get moving. :)


12 posted on 03/31/2010 4:47:17 PM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
I tend to agree with you, I just wish they’d get moving. :)

The Air Force is going to request for bid for a CSAR-X or personnel recovery recapitalization aircraft (Helicopter) within a few months...My money is on Boeing to get this one also...


13 posted on 03/31/2010 4:53:23 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

At breakfast with the CSAF yesterday, the Chief addressed the question of an RFP extension.

He said the Air Force would consider extending the RFP date IF EADS was serious. The point is, if EADS is serious, meaning capable and ready to make a serious bid that meets the RFP section L and M requirements, then the Air Force would be open to receiving the bid. The Chief did not go any deeper than that.

To think extending the deadline is done easily as a CYA, that isn’t accurate, as the Chief made clear, as the AQP staff made clear during discussions later that day.


14 posted on 03/31/2010 4:56:59 PM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Here’s the problem. The Air Force really needs EADS to bid to prevent Boeing from putting the screw to the Air Force on price. However, the politics strongly favor Boeing, and EADS does not want to waste $$millions preparing an RFP response just to help the Air Force get a lower bid from Boeing.


15 posted on 03/31/2010 5:11:10 PM PDT by Zap Brannigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hulka
Right now the Extension is only be considered...Odds are it won't happens. In my opinion this is much ado about nothing.

And I do believe it's a CYOA move been watching this going on for over three weeks...Seen this same song and dance from the AFMC Commander (4 Stars) to move an entire Test Wing not so far from where he was retiring...And it was determined that there was no conflict of interest...


16 posted on 03/31/2010 5:11:13 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104
The Pentagon desperately needs a second bid to claim the whole process was fair.

Not really. DoD can decide to sole source the contract if it deems that sole source if it deems that there are no competent competitors, or that the competitors may pose procurement risks, like being foreign source would.

17 posted on 03/31/2010 5:38:08 PM PDT by Magnum44 (Terrorism is a disease, precise application of superior firepower is the cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

Why has Lockheed stayed away from this bid?


18 posted on 03/31/2010 5:56:11 PM PDT by southernerwithanattitude ({new and improved redneck})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Magnum44
Not really. DoD can decide to sole source the contract if it deems that sole source if it deems that there are no competent competitors, or that the competitors may pose procurement risks, like being foreign source would.

Here's the catch...Obama ran on a campaign against "No-Bid" or "Sole-Source" Contracts ala Halliburton...Looks like the Pentagon needs a second bid as not to upset the One...Politics has been in play in the KC-X process since day one. I am thinking this is upsetting a few Acquisition wonks because Northrop Grumman-EADS isn't playing along.

I've been watching this process going on for three weeks. This report could of been written three weeks ago and it will still be rehashed over and over again til May 10th, when the contract will be awarded.


19 posted on 03/31/2010 6:05:21 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: southernerwithanattitude
They had a subcontract with Northrop Grumman-EADS Team in the Assembly of the tanker...


20 posted on 03/31/2010 6:07:13 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson