Antonov jumps into the KC-x competition

[DHG750R]

From Flightglobal

US company parnters with Antonov in surprise KC-X bid
By Stephen Trimble

A new US company has entered the race for the US Air Force KC-X contract with a bid based on Ukrainian-built Antonov series airlifters.
A 1 July regulatory filing by the publicly-traded US Aerospace Inc. confirms the firm intends to bid in response to the USAF request for proposals for KC-X.
The filing document says US Aerospace will submit three models of Antonov aircraft - An-124-KC, An-122-KC and An-112-KC - before the KC-X bidding deadline on 9 July. The aircraft will be assembled in the US, but built in the Ukraine.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... x-bid.html (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/02/343992/us-company-parnters-with-antonov-in-surprise-kc-x-bid.html)

[T-Bird76]

There is no way in hell a Russian plane will ever wear the colors of the USAF...

[PhilDernerJr]

Oh yeah?! What about SIKORSKY?!!?!?!?!!? haha

[SengaB]

Been there done that Tommy! :)
Sorry I had to throw in the LAST one LOL

http://www.aviation-history.com/mikoyan/mig15-16.gif

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/USAF_MiG-15.jpg/800px-USAF_MiG-15.jpg

http://www.clavework-graphics.co.uk/aircraft/fantasy/F06_Su27_Blue%20Angels.png

[cancidas]

damn, that SU-27 looks pretty damn good in USN Blue... if i'm not mistaken the fighter weapins school operated a few types, and there are army units in texas using Mil helicopters as agressors as well.

[SengaB]

That's true and in FL as well. Also the the Navy has aggressor colors too.
Speaking of aggressor.....I will tell you some of the USAF planes look best in aggressor.

Senga

[cancidas]

That's true and in FL as well. Also the the Navy has aggressor colors too.
Speaking of aggressor.....I will tell you some of the USAF planes look best in aggressor.

Senga
when we were still in the market for a PC-12 my buddies and i were going to have ours painted in the blue agressor camo. pilatus loved the idea, our insurance company didn't....

[Derf]

Oh yeah?! What about SIKORSKY?!!?!?!?!!? haha

Sikorsky was founded in 1925 by aircraft engineer Igor Sikorsky, a Kiev-born American immigrant.[1] The company, named "Sikorsky Manufacturing Company", began aircraft production in Roosevelt, New York that year. In 1929 the company moved to Stratford, Connecticut


Sikorsky was started on Long Island...It is a NY company that moved to CT. I do not understand.

[PhilDernerJr]

My "haha" was meant to imply that I was just kidding. I'm very familiar with his history of course! :borat:

[Tom_Turner]

Antonov Design Bureau was a Soviet company, and the aircraft a Soviet design, but its a (state owned) Ukrainian company now.

The jobs will be in the US, just as they would with Airbus.

Why bother having a bidding contest in the first place if the intent is just to pass along more taxpayer or treasury printing $$$ to Boeing?

[moose135]

The jobs will be in the US, just as they would with Airbus.
Just like with Airbus, some of the jobs will be in the US. Apparently, they plan to do much of the construction in the Ukraine, with final assembly in the US, just like Airbus plans to do much of the work on their tanker in France, with final assembly in the US. And of course, all the design and engineering work gets done overseas as w


Why bother having a bidding contest in the first place if the intent is just to pass along more taxpayer or treasury printing $$$ to Boeing?You might ask John McCain that - he's been a backer of Airbus in this for years. As long as we need new tankers, I don't have a problem sourcing them to a US manufacturer - it keeps more jobs here, it keeps more money here, and it keeps the industrial base here.

[PhilDernerJr]

I agree with Moose...but I think we need something as a bit of a wakeup call to make the US work a little harder. I feel we've become lazy and need to step it up some.

[cancidas]

I agree with Moose...but I think we need something as a bit of a wakeup call to make the US work a little harder. I feel we've become lazy and need to step it up some.
very well said... greed, complacency, ignorance and follishness seem to be paramount in much of corporate america.

[Matt Molnar]

This is probably a crazy, bulls#$% story just like the last time it was floated a few months ago.

Back then, a Los Angeles lawyer named John Kirkland claimed he was working with a company called United Aerospace to place a bid using Antonovs. Antonov said they had never heard of the guy. The end.

Today the same John Kirkland is pushing the same Antonov idea with a company of a slightly different name, U.S. Aerospace. They're publicly traded and they make parts for Boeing, Lockheed and other firms...but they're broke. They've defaulted on several loans and owe back taxes to the state and feds.

So yeah, good luck with that. :-)

[T-Bird76]

Been there done that Tommy! :)


You know what I mean.... ;)

[SengaB]

Yes,
I'm just giving you a hard time :)

Senga

[Tom_Turner]

Well, here's to everyone driving an American made car then, American electronics, etc... :lol:

I am all in favor of keeping jobs in the USA, and insanely in favor of maintaining an industrial base in the USA, however, if we're going to split hairs, *some* of the Boeing jobs may end up not being "here" either as they've become an outsourcer of the first order (not that they have a choice if they want to compete outside of Govt largess ...)

And there are plenty of American citizens in other states - non union workers though they may be, they still count - that might like to have a job (working for the A330 tanker).

And what about the idea of the military and our soldiers having the best possible equipment for the mission? Its a slippery slope to turn the requirement into a jobs program. Look what has happened to NASA's mission becoming cultural cheer-leading...

Mind you I don't believe Antonov would be the likely answer here. :D

Tom