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

Skip to comments.

Airbus Works on Final Aerial Tanker Bid, Claiming Edge on Boeing
Bloomberg ^ | December 17, 2010 | Andrea Rothman

Posted on 12/17/2010 6:47:22 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki

Airbus Works on Final Aerial Tanker Bid, Claiming Edge on Boeing

December 17, 2010, 3:34 AM EST

By Andrea Rothman

Dec. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Airbus Military said it’s working on a final bid in the $35 billion U.S. Air Force airborne tanker contest as it seeks to trump Boeing Co. in a delayed competition that has already spanned nine years.

Airbus’s defense arm is bullish about winning the order because its A330 airliner-based model offers greater capability than Boeing’s 767, Domingo Urena Raso, the unit’s chief executive officer, said in an interview in Toulouse, France.

“Our plane is bigger, it has a cabin in which you can do medical evacuation or transport soldiers or ground crews, and it provides more fuel capacity, hence flying further and being able to refuel more fighters,” he said. “You’d otherwise need two or three different aircraft to perform the same types of mission.”

Boeing said its bid meets all mandatory requirements and that Airbus’s plane is “oversized.” The Air Force said Nov. 20 it would delay making a choice until early 2011 after mistakenly disclosing both bidders’ data on combat-mission analysis. Urena Raso declined to comment on how the proposals might be affected by the revelations, which didn’t include pricing information.

Airbus is still answering final questions about its plane, which would carry 270 troops and ground equipment in addition to fuel, Urena Raso said, and expects the Pentagon to ask for final bids shortly, ahead of an evaluation period to pick the winner.

Going Solo

The Airbus tanker was originally chosen by the U.S. Air Force over Boeing’s proposal in 2007, only

(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; airbus; boeing; eads; kcx; tanker; usaf

1 posted on 12/17/2010 6:47:28 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

This is surreal.

I can’t believe we’re even considering EUrope for our defense needs.

Buy American.


2 posted on 12/17/2010 6:56:09 AM PST by Finalapproach29er (God humbles and (if need be) destroys the false idols of the peoples. Be patient, folks...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Finalapproach29er

Where do think we get most of the parts for the M1 tank and the M16 from?


3 posted on 12/17/2010 6:57:54 AM PST by Perdogg (What Would Aqua Buddha do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Considering the size of the Defense budget, strategic common sense and current economic climate there should be a Constitution Amendment that requires every last DOD cent to be spent in America.

This is as insane as the original order of Army berets from a Chinese manufacturer.


4 posted on 12/17/2010 7:00:54 AM PST by TSgt (Colonel Allen West & Michele Bachman - 2012 POTUS Dream Team Ticket!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The Airbus Tanker and it’s fueling systems have already undergone successful tests with Nato Air Forces whereas Boeings plane is still on the draft board. For everyones information, the EADS plane if succesful will be built in Alabama by non-union labor. Contrary to public perception, many of Boeings parts come from foreign suppliers.


5 posted on 12/17/2010 7:07:17 AM PST by Old Retired Army Guy (tHE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Finalapproach29er

I can’t believe we’re even considering EUrope for our defense needs.


I don´t get this too.
Believe me the “europeans” (and i´m one of them ;-)
would never do this (buy someting made in america if they can also manufacture it in the same quality on their own).
Especially in times of a finacial cricis.
But the again who needs jobs? /s


6 posted on 12/17/2010 7:08:00 AM PST by darkside321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The Airbus Tanker and it’s fueling systems have already undergone successful tests with Nato Air Forces whereas Boeings plane is still on the draft board. For everyones information, the EADS plane if succesful will be built in Alabama by non-union labor. Contrary to public perception, many of Boeings parts come from foreign suppliers.


7 posted on 12/17/2010 7:09:23 AM PST by Old Retired Army Guy (tHE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Finalapproach29er

Contrary to public persecption Boeing buys the majority of its parts from foreign suppliers. The Airbus tanker and its’ refueling sustems have already been successfully flight tested wit European and Asian Air Forces. The Boeing plane is still on a blue print. The Boeing plane would be asembled in Everett WA by Union workers and subject to work stopages. The Airbus plane would be asembled in Mobile AL (Which the last time I checked was in the U.S.) by non-union workers.


8 posted on 12/17/2010 7:12:59 AM PST by Old Retired Army Guy (tHE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

what are the bribery specs?

dollar? euros? or barrels of oil?


9 posted on 12/17/2010 7:17:28 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I think the Air Force should split the order. Splitting the order will increase the flexibility (large and small tankers). I do not see much advantage for the Airbus troop capacity. I cannot see many situations in which troop transport will be a mission of a tanker.


10 posted on 12/17/2010 7:19:22 AM PST by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Finalapproach29er

This is surreal.

I can’t believe we’re even considering EUrope for our defense needs.

Buy American.


I see why some have labeled Free Traders as “Free Traitors”

Absolutely suicidal in regards to national security. Europe, as a whole, is not the threat that the Communist Chinese or Russians are. At least until the Islamic Extremists start taking over Europe


11 posted on 12/17/2010 7:21:53 AM PST by UCFRoadWarrior (Whenever something is "Global"...it means its bad for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
what are the bribery specs?

Votes in Illinois, Kansas, and Washington state

12 posted on 12/17/2010 7:21:53 AM PST by Oztrich Boy (History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce - Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: darkside321

FYI: Appproximately 2,000 Alabamians will be hired to build this plane - and yes, contrary to what politicians in DC and Washington state are saying, we are Americans and Alabama IS one of the 50 states.


13 posted on 12/17/2010 7:27:03 AM PST by BamaDi ("The definition of a racist today is anyone who is winning an argument with a liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy

Using an Airbus ‘green’ aircraft, it would be assembled in Europe and then flown to AL for modifications.

The Boeing 767 with Pratt engines is a far superior aircraft. I pray we make the correct decision on this one.


14 posted on 12/17/2010 7:35:20 AM PST by Java4Jay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy

Airbus got its name ‘Scarebus’ for a reason... recycled junk that won’t last 50 years.

The Boeing is far superior


15 posted on 12/17/2010 7:46:33 AM PST by Java4Jay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy

Boeing products are more reliable and less costly to maintain.


16 posted on 12/17/2010 7:57:29 AM PST by Java4Jay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Hey Americans?

You probably do not know what this man´s name means?

Domingo Urena Raso - “Domingo” is for Sunday - “Urena” is for he who pee - “Raso” means little.

Such a suggestive name ain´t it?

17 posted on 12/17/2010 8:08:36 AM PST by Mayr Fortuna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy
The Airbus Tanker and it’s fueling systems have already undergone successful tests with Nato Air Forces whereas Boeings plane is still on the draft board. For everyones information, the EADS plane if succesful will be built in Alabama by non-union labor. Contrary to public perception, many of Boeings parts come from foreign suppliers.

Don't try to bring logic and reason into this discussion on FR. You could slap a Boeing sticker on an Ilyushin Il-78 and they'd still be cheerleading for the "American" one to win.

18 posted on 12/17/2010 8:31:32 AM PST by gura (If Allah is so great, why does he need fat sexually confused fanboys to do his dirty work? -iowahawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gura

These days Boeing resembles a bloated state-owned corporation reminiscent of those existing in the socialist bloc. What makes things potentially worse is that it’s domestic defense market (US military) is much larger than what Airbus can hope to achieve in Europe.


19 posted on 12/17/2010 8:36:34 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: gura

“You could slap a Boeing sticker on an Ilyushin Il-78 and they’d still be cheerleading for the “American” one to win.”

Maybe EADS should rename their US business unit to AADS and paint a big flag on it.

American Aeronautic Defence and Space
1616 North Ft. Myer Drive
Suite 1600
Arlington, VA 22209


20 posted on 12/19/2010 8:16:33 AM PST by buzzer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: darkside321; Java4Jay
But the again who needs jobs? /s

The interesting aspect of the whole deal is the freighter line that Airbus wants to build in Alabama. If they get the tanker, they will move practically their whole freighter business (A330Fs) to the US. Why? Because they want to hegde against future currency fluctuations and be on the safe side if the dollar takes a nosedive because the national debt has gotten out of control.

The Boeing 767 with Pratt engines is a far superior aircraft. I pray we make the correct decision on this one.

Far superior - how so? On the civilian side the newer Airbus beat the 767 in the marketplace because it offered more aircraft at a negligibly higher price, just like the newer 787 offers more range and flexibility than the older A330 today. The Airbus could be configured with Pratts as well. But what would be wrong with GEs? (I don't see a snowball's chance in hell of the USAF going for RollsRoyce engines after the A380 debacle).
21 posted on 12/19/2010 8:44:40 AM PST by wolf78 (Inflation is a form of taxation, too. Cranky Libertarian - equal opportunity offender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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