Boeing loses out on $35B Air Force program


Take care,
space

Funny that they call it "Paris-based", considering that it is really a Netherlands-registered company with two headquarters (Munich-Ottobrunn and Paris). Guess the French side has better relationships with the press...

The Air Force still has to run this through the GAO and Congress. Good luck in an election year.

There is an appeal process, but given the history of the bidding on this contract and the fact that EADS is going to create jobs in Alabama, it may not be upheld.

the wings will be made in Bristol and North Wales so good for UK jobs as well.

I believe that the jobs will be for final assembly. The parts - wings, tails, fuselage, engines will come from overseas.

Interesting to note that it was John McCain how threw the brakes to stop Boeing from getting the bid the first time around. Now he is running for president with US tax dollars being spent to procure defense contracts from overseas suppliers. Prepare to see a lot of "dancing" from this candidate in explaining how this is good for America.

if you expect other countries to buy your planes, bombs and tanks maybe it is time to start reciprocating. Don't forget, projects like the Joint Strike Fighter etc.

No expectations good or bad, just stating that since this is an election year and everyone overseas seems to want the Democrats to win, don't be surprised if they (Democrats) really do what their platform states, which is to stop the outsourcing of US manufacturing jobs overseas.

Logic has nothing to do with it. It's Political.

FYI - Alabama is a right to work state, meaning that the jobs will most likely go to non-union workers. Another reason for Democrats to scrap the deal to EADS.

So I take it there are no plans to stop wars in the near future???

The whole world lives off of the defense industry in some capacity or other it seems.

FF

FF, I believe that Germany, for example, is the world's third-largest exporter of arms, so even countries which abhor war benefit. There are some positive externalities from military R&D, but, yes, it would be best if geopolitical conditions improved to where defense spending could be sharply reduced.

Once again you are wrong my friend. Here is a source who is in your eyes not biased:


Edit for link: Visit My Website

wrong.

Click to view attachment

What about fifth?

While there's a profit to be made killing little brown people... are you mad?

So which is it?

Isreal is either number 4 or not even in the top 9 of the worlds largest exporter of weapons?

Since these are 2 extremes, someone is not telling the truth or they are going to use the "I meant as a % of GDP or population or some other number to manipulate the data"

Let's just keep it simple - like total arms sales priced in US dollars.

Did you look at the dates of your statistic? It is 2008 and not 2006 anymore

and yours is from 2002

Theres nothing wrong with German made H&K in the US to help get 1% of the pop. into jail and german electric chairs to grill them.

-It's sick ain't it. thufrin thukatasch

taxidriver, considering 2008 just started it's a bit ridiculous to ask for complete 2008 figures. Rankings may vary from year to year, but it is safe to assume Germany is still one of the major arms exporters.

I'm not talking about 2008 just yet, but 2007's data is available and if you read the article, it is from the 9th of december 2007...

So Germany is in third place one year, but not the next. Are you trying to say that our fair land is not a major weapons exporter?

Germany is one of the main exporters of Anti-Missile defence technology, especially to Israel.

Not to forget the new ultra quiet subs(that even appear "beside" US aircraft carriers and ruin admirals breakfasts) that are also on the buying(donating) list in israel. Must add that israel only got the diesel electric version but with modified tubes(that are probably nuc-capable)

German subs

according to that link, they are all non-nuclear subs. They use fuel cell technology to run quiet. This is the technology not offered on the israeli subs.

Sorry wasn't clear on that. The israelis wanted larger tubes(launch tubes) to larger specs but didn't say for what, so the saying is they will make them nuc-launch capable by them selves(which of course is not possible cause israel has no nuc's )

You got it, kind of like the US basket ball team, in 1986 they are number one, 1990 they are number 3, 1994 they are number one again, 1998 they are third again... and 2002 they don't even make it out of the quarter finals... data as performance changes from year to year.

And as for mayor weapons exporter... mayor is a relative term...

I've just got a copy of the side by side specs if anyone's interested in why the Grumman/EADS bid won?

Hi Dave! I'm interested.

Isn't some US Senator trying to get a bill through to block this?
Something that the US military should only buy from companies based where the country has a minimum X% spend on defence.

It all depends what the GAO (government accounting office) says. If the Air Force changed the specs mid-competition (as Boeing has claimed) or did not evaluate the bids fairly- then it may be put out for rebid.

This is not the first time the Air Force has been accused of not abidding by the strict bid request specifications. During the CSAR-X competition (helicopter replacement) - the GAO found that the Air Force did not evaluate the life-cycle costs (- the cost to operate the helicopter). The GAO told them to get stuffed & the contract is now out for rebid.

Of course if the GAO determines there was no bias or failure to follow of the proposal guidelines - then the contract will be awarded. BUT- in an election year - congress can just refuse to fund it & the program will die. It all depends on who gets elected...

BTW, Boeing is headquartered in Chicago...

Does your name have anything to do with the fact that you are talking about helicopters