Boeing fights U.S. tanker deal

[Dartagnyn]

This makes complete sense. Lets face it, these guys were flying 50year old aircraft. Now they'll have brand new 767 derivatives...err..wait a second, they'll be flying newish replacements that are based on the dependable...err hold on. Surely they won't be flying an aircraft based on an airframe from the mid 80's....will they? Oh, ok....well at least the aircraft won't be quite so old. At least they're Boeings anyway, whatever their age....I'm sure we can rely on the Government to get it right

[acsilver12]

Boeing won the tanker deal!  Congrats Boeing!

[YanYan1337]

i work on kc-135's and although im still new to the job i believe the airbus is a OUTSTANDING choice its bigger than the kc 767 its more fuel efficient, its more modern and its supposedly more reliable, if Boeing was smart they would have designed a tanker out of the new Boeing Dream liner.... :D

Just hurry up and get these out before the KC1356 DESTROYS me

[LottoWinner999]

@YanYan1337 Hey mate I'm a patriotic Brit, test pilot for her Majestys RAF + for Airbus. We owe USA our bloody freedom + lifes + they saved us from Germans in WW1 + WW2. After WW2 Marshall Plan gave us free planes, trains, trucks + busses till we got on our feet. Boeing planes R the best + upgrades B767 will make AB-Tanker look like junk. BTW I've taken a position with Boeing cuz Airbus is owned by Nazis and my advice is for Britain is to buy the new Boeing 767 NewGen Tanker USAF KC-X!

[YanYan1337]

@LottoWinner999 Lol well boeing just snagged the contract for the new tanker and i CANNOT WAIT to work on them :D, im gonna be like 28 by the time their released tho :< i was pretty confused by what has been happening with the KC-X thing since i couldnt reall find info on it that last comment was based off info from like 2 years ago haha

[hamace]

Where is the outrage?

[cyberOwwwOecho]

The Defense Department's RFP ignores the added combat capability that could be provided to our military and, for the first time, ensures that our allies will operate with superior capability in this vital mission area. This so-called competition was not structured to produce the best outcome for our men and women in uniform; it was structured to produce the best outcome for Boeing.

[dsjj251]

FUCK Boeing

The Gulf Coast Needs this

[dsjj251]

where the fuck do you think the gulf coast is.

it would be built in Mobile,Alabama if EADS/N.Grummen won

actually EADS did win, but boeing is a little bitch

[lidul]

Actually, the entire country needs our airforce to be more advanced and more efficient, and airbus can definately give us that. All Boeing will do is give us planes that fall out of the sky.

[dsjj251]

exactly.

[lidul]

Lol wow you can't tell a fucking joke when you see one. And FYI, I know what exponents are. Can you find a quadratic equation from only a few numbers? Or an EXPONENTIAL one? And may I tell you that I am a 4.0 student, and I am going to skip 9th grade math next year and go straight into 10th. I have never even gotten anything under a B+ on a report card, NEVER! I was also feautured in my local newspaper for my excellence in academics. So please, I think YOU should go re-learn exponents.

[Brad1711]

If you've gotten a B+ how do you have a 4.0? Or are you rounding in your own favor? I got about a 3.7 in Aeronautical Engineering from one of the best programs in the world, so you're really not going to impress me a whole lot.

[lidul]

I got one b+ in seventh grade, every other report card was solid a's. A 3.7 from a top aeronautical engineering program is very impressive, I will admit that. But seriously, why are we arguing over what happened in the past? I mean, we have almost no influence on what the airforce does. Look at area 51! They deny that it even exists! What I am trying to say is that yes boeing and airbus are both great companies, and we both have our different opinions.

[Brad1711]

They do? I thought the AF stopped denying Area 51's existence years ago.

EADS has definitely made its presence known and felt in the international market in a short time. Boeing has slipped in recent years. I feel like the MD merger transferred a lot of solid programs into Boeing's name but also introduced a lot of problems into the enterprise with different ways of doing things. 787 program seems to represent this quite well with the Executives trying to run the show disregarding Engineering

[Brad1711]

To answer your question: It's still up the in the air.

EADS really didn't have a better proposal than Boeing did: each had strengths and weaknesses.

EADS: Greater capacity, lower acquisition cost. Higher LCC, not compatible with existing AF infrastructure, significantly higher fuel burn, refueling system questionable.

B: Fits mission profile very closely, lower fuel burn, lower LCC, compatible with existing facilities, builds on B's long experience with tankers. More $ up-front, less capacity.

[internetvideossuck]

You're a real tool arguing with a 8th grader. Get off youtube and go get a life mr. successful aerospace person. Oh wait, you don't have friends? Probably because you're such a tool that you argue with 8th graders.

[Brad1711]

Have you even read all the comments on here? Sorry if you're bitter that I'm right...

[Nicoladrag]

ps..."brad"...have you got the figures or info to substantiate your claims about fuel burn, mission profile compatibility etc of 330, to 76?...........................­.....didnt think so.

[Brad1711]

Well most of it is proprietary, but a quick look on wikipedia says KC-767 fuel capacity is 160,660 lb with range of 6385nm. A330MRTT page doesn't give fuel capacity, but the main A330 page says 139,100 L so we'll say 257,000 pounds, and a range of 6700nm, though the A330-200R has a listed range of 4000nm. I trust you can do the math from here, "Nicola"

[dergrossen]

Tax payers money went into Airbus so in reality the project was not financed by market forces. As a paying customer I know the Airbus products to be better than the Boeings but then they should be..they had plenty of government support to make them better.

[eXowomb]

boeing has govt support too... anyone knwos that.

[lidul]

Yeah, the only reason that's true is because it is an American company and it benefits the economy, even though airbus is much better. And people wonder why the airforce chose EADS.

[lidul]

boeing sucks, airbus is the shit, end of story. boeing, just go back to ur delay-liner 787 and kiss airbuses ass!

[ryanspeed]

Well put lidul!

I've worked for Boeing before....I know how they are!

Northrop Grumman/EADS has worked their ass off to get this contract and they deserve it.

All the while Boeing sat on their ass and thought THEY were "entitled" to it.

Not to mention the fact that Japan received their tanker late as hell and Italy is currently planning to penalize Boeing for being 3 years late on their tanker!

I'm sure the Northrop tanker will prevail!

Boeing

Sorry, your days of a monopoly are OVER!

[Brad1711]

What a mature, eloquent post. Except for some reason you put a "The" between "Airbus is" and "shit"

[lidul]

Yeah real funny. But still, no matter what you say, airbus will always be better.

[maicodude69]

The tanker deal for EADS was lobbied to the air force by the same man who lobbied to have the ENRON loophole enacted giving speculaters the oppertunity to drive the price of gas through the roof that man is JOHN MCCAINS campain manager etter hope tey don't get in office or let the rape and pillage continue

[jayes12]

Boeing planes are built all over the world not just in the U.S.A. If the Air Force reverses this CONTRACT with Northrup Grumman, it will send a horrible message to the world about the way that America does business. We already have a bad standing in the world, according to some politicians, breaching contracts will not help matters at all.

[tinian33]

I totally agree with you. Here's the bottom line:why even go to bid if it's supposed to go to an American company, regardless whether or not Boeing's bid is inferior? What happened to competitive forces in the market place? As an American citizens, I say that we rely on the quality of our work and our ability to compete, and we should be careful with this concept that if we cloak something in the American flag it has to be superior, no questions asked.

[arkain21]

It's funny to see a giant like Boeing whine and cry after they lost the deal mainly due to their arrogance and overconfidence.

[lidul]

boeing is just crying over spilled milk! they are acting like fuckin children!

[ezy34]

we americans must regain its power, dominance and leadership in the world!!! stop investing in other countries well for now and help strengthen our economy!!!

[simpsonstewie]

how about we invest in other countries and spend that money in us?

[kirkload]

we are doing that today and look how screw up is the economy

[ezy34]

the decision is greatly affected by politics BullS##t.. france is not agreeing with the US since iraq war and other european countries so the US starts courting its major allies again... this is what republicans do giving priorities in forein affairs which is not applicable right now because US is in recession.. so dont vote for MCCAIN this election or america will be put on more to worse.. we need a democrat this time because they focus in domestic welfare!!! democrats must unite!!!

[proudbelgian]

Saying Boeing products are far superior is pure BS. It's self suggestion.

Airbus exist since 1970(if I'm not mistaken that's 38 years) and was composed of divers firms that were in the business long before.

About the subsidies, you should thank the Euros to subsidise your Airforce and doing so reduce your abyssal budget deficit.

[pinoyaggie]

Yeah Airbus was formed in the 70's. But Boeing was founded in 1916. That's 92 years of aerospace experience for you. Plus, Airbus was formed with an agreement with U.S. aircraft companies such as MD, Lockheed, and Boeing that in Airbus's early years they will allow government subsidies. Now this agreement was a bad idea because it killed Lockheed and MD's commercial airplanes market share. And only Boeing and Airbus exist today. Europe is supposed to stop these subsidies but it still continue.

[proudbelgian]

I understand now why they use 1916 technology. LOL.

And your cars suck too, those big SUVs with their cart suspension...You should develop ,this is 21rst century.

And I say again the companies that formed AIRBUS had been in the business for tens of years.

[pinoyaggie]

Oh I see so the 787 is a 1916 technology that AIRBUS (with pressure from airlines) followed with the A350XWB. Airbus is nothing but a follower. What Boeing does, they try to outdo it. They just do the wait and see, instead of lead in innovation. Singapore airlines sold their A340s to Boeing in exchange for 777s because it is the suck. Boeing then twicked the A340s and sold it to an African airlines. Airbus was not happy about it. That scenario never happened to Boeing. At least that I know off.

[lidul]

hey boeing is just a load of crap. and that thing u said, "what boeing does, they (airbus) try to out do it". dude, that is what competition is all about!

[Brad1711]

You are still a moron.  When the shit hits the fans, Airbus's airplanes come unglued and people die. Boeing actually knows what it's doing and doesn't rely on its government to spy on Airbus. Can't say the same for Airbus and the French government.

[dsjj251]

are you serious, type in Boeing crash, then type in Airbus Crash, boeing has hundreds of videos on its crashes

747,767,727,737 crashes, should i keep going.

[Brad1711]

Did you ever stop to think that it's because Boeing has been around for 80 years and has built probably 10 times the number of aircraft Airbus has?

[lidul]

Hahahaha well have you stopped to think that airbus has control of 50% of the market, and they have only been around since the 70s?

[Brad1711]

You have any idea how much money the European governments have poured into Airbus over the years in subsidies to get it on its feet? Very common in the European aerospace sector. See: Concorde.

[lidul]

Ah yes but now look at them. Boeing got on their feet when they were the only ones that made aircraft. Airbus was born into the world with Boeing and Lockeed Martin to compete with.

[dsjj251]

yes boeing still crashes more planes,

Airbus profit is in dollars but its costs are in Euros,atleast on stuff on this side of the ocean

[lidul]

Hahahaha more like when the boeing plans come apart. Have you ever wondered why it's named Boeing? Because it sounds like "boing!", the same noise that bolts make when they shoot out of thier planes.

[Nicoladrag]

Actually ...."Brad"..its the other way round. In the late 80s, i worked at Airbus, and we had to keep all info as confidential as possible, due to reports that Boeing were using your NSA, to gain info, so that Boeing could get a heads up on contracts

[Brad1711]

That doesn't mean Airbus and France don't do it, "Nicola".

[tobaritchpingun]

A 320, setting the standards. Enough said.

[boeinggal]

A contract won fair and square with an equal playing field for both parties is not a subsidy. It's simply a profitable contract for whomever receives it. Handing money over for nothing as the European Union does for Airbus is a subsidy. Underwriting their expenses and development dollars with government money without receiving anything is a subsidy. Receiving a contract from the government and actually supplying a product is not a subsidy. Is this clear enough for you?

[boeinggal]

Airbus is a government subsidized company with a inferior product to Boeing. They are toddlers wandering around with their hands out wanting to be taken care of. The planes they entered into bidding were not even what the Air Force requested. I don't know why our Air Force is stabbing the American people in the back by going with a bargain basement competitor like Airbus. I pray Boeing wins it's challenge and the bidding is begun again with fewer concessions made for Airbus.

[arsenium666]

So...if Airbus receives US Tax Payers Dollars that´s considered a subsidy, but if Boeing is the other competitor...then Boeing is supposed to receive that subsidy?...

Then...Isn´t Boeing the Loser Company that has been receiving subsidies during more than 50 years from the US??? Once they´d LOST the first SUBSIDY they start CRYING like WHORES.

Shut your Mouths American LOSERS.

[Antiworld23]

Keep talking. Congress is going to axe the deal you can count on it.

[Antiworld23]

Keep talking. Congress is going to axe the deal you can count on it.

[ilonas8888]

So this is free market economy, America! Airbus just have the better plane!

[cmatos2007]

You could be right arsenium. But, Boeing hasn't protested a contract in a LONG time. They must have a good reason for this. Lets just wait and see what is said.

[aussiedog123]

Way to go Mobile. The KC-45 will be proudly built by Americans in the great state of Alabama.

[thegoosebrain]

FVCK N/G! Cry babies! This is nothing more than corporate welfare to keep giving these companies contracts even thou they can't produce the best product at the lowest price! So are we just to keep awarding them then contracts even after they lose? Hell, why even have biding if they think they are entitled to always keep winning the contracts simply because they are N/G!

America is such a frickin cry baby

[boeinggal]

Boeings products are far superior to Airbus. Don't let your national pride confuse the issue. Airbus is still learning what to do and compared to Boeing they are in their infancy.

[Mired81]

There goes a bunch of jobs! =\