Comments on: EADS In Tatters As GAO Sides With Boeing

By: Doug McVitie

Doug McVitie — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:29:58 +0000

What is the opposite of the Midas touch and will EADS put this new technology on the A350, if it ever builds it?

They’ve certainly got enough to spare…

By: 787fan

787fan — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:01:59 +0000

On March 28, 2002, the US Air Force selected Boeing’s KC-767 stating they “have clearly demonstrated that only the Boeing Corp. can currently meet the requirements”.[2]

The USAF was listed as giving four main reasons for this selection of the KC-767 over Airbus’s KC-330 (aircraft’s name at the time).[2]

“”The KC-330 increase in size does not bring with it a commensurate increase in available air refueling offload,…” (USAF quote)
The KC-330 “..presents a higher-risk technical approach and a less preferred financial arrangement.” (USAF quote)
” the size difference of the EADS-proposed KC-330 results in an 81 percent larger ground footprint compared to the KC-135E it would replace, whereas the Boeing 767 is only 29 percent larger.” (USAF quote)
The KC-330 requires “..greater infrastructure investment and dramatically limits the aircraft’s ability to operate effectively in worldwide deployment.” (Summary of Quote by MAT magazine)

So doesn’t the selection of the KC-45 somehow STINK…like someone put pressure on the Air Force..
Like John McCaine-who has former EADS Lobbyist on this Staff..>>>

By: 787fan

787fan — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:21:01 +0000

I’ve been waiting for YOUR article. I knew it would be the best and most informative. And it was worth waitng for. THANK YOU…
As fas the Tanker Deal….
I personally crewed a KC-135 in the 70’s and they are the best built Aircraft in the World, thats why they are still flying today. 50 years..!!! And I won’t mention the Boeing B-52…and the best is yet to come…787…Blended Wing Body..BTW..ONLY Boeing has developed the future. Can you say “Unattended Inflight Refueling”…
**If it’s not Boeing, I’m not going….
The Air Force tried it’s best to disregard the facts and get the Airbus. They apparently don’t care if American jobs go to AIRBUS..
How can anyone stand-by and let them ship parts to the US and then assemble them here on our turf…That is still a European Aircraft.
**Thank you GAO for support of American Jobs and
American Aerospace. There is still none better than a Boeing..
**Go Boeing..Go America….Go Home Airbus..

By: BOEING777

BOEING777 — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:48:30 +0000

Semantics: the fact remains that A330 production, whether pax or freighter was planned to be moved out of France with a view to making space for the A350.

An A330F line can just as easily accomodate the A330-200, upon which its based.

By: Mark Dowling

Mark Dowling — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:09:45 +0000

The A330 was not being shifted to the US - the A330F was. Not the same thing, and the Airbus unions weren’t happy that even that much was going.

By: Chris Wallace

Chris Wallace — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:19:58 +0000

The GAO is a pretty impartial group, so that they ruled so strongly does indeed pretty much force the USAF to rebid.

The USAF has continually stated that they want the NG/EADS KC-30A so I wonder if Boeing will move to the 767-300 frame for the re-bid to increase the payload. Or perhaps they will dust off the 767-400ERX plans to get the payload even higher.

That the Democrats will almost assuredly increase their strength in Congress, even if McCain does win the Presidency it is likely that Congress is going to be more inclined to order the “home team” which favors Boeing’s chances.

By: Aurora

Aurora — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:43:06 +0000

I believe that you are correct when you say the revenue impact on EADS will be minimal and that the real impact is that it removes the political cover for them to move a production facility to the “dollar zone”. After farming out A320 work to China, I suspect the Euro politicians and unions will tolerate no more of this for the near term. That aside, there is nothing to stop them from going ahead on their own euro and continuing with the facility in Alabama, unless the Russians or UAE jump in and protest. They are part owners of EADS after all.

EADS is not out of the woods by any stretch–yet. There’s the WTO ruling expected soon.

As for the tanker “deal”, it’s effectively dead. Already influential members of the U.S. Congress are clamoring for a rebid. Two of those voices belong to Senators Obama and McCain. The USAF will be forced to start over.

I suspect the next Request For Proposals will read significantly different from the last one and will be broadened in scope to include things like employment, infrastructure impact, foreign influence, etc.–all those things which should properly be considered in taxpayer funded procurements.