Air Force Snubs Boeing, Orders Airbus Tankers

[Tom_Turner]

It does seem as though the USAF got the better aircraft for the mission though, doesn't it?

It'll at least be assembled in Alabama, and Northrop will be a part of it.

Boeing is (out of necessity) outsourcing their aircraft production anyway. What difference does it really make?

Tom

[Squirrel_PA]

Well this is not good news for the 767 program. There are a limited number of orders on the books and unless more contracts are won for the KC-767 tanker program or commerical orders the production will be doomed to the death of the 757 line.

Now if the CSAR-X program goes the way this went Boeing stock is going to tank until the 787 problems are resolved.

I am quite surprised about this decision.....

Barry

[T-Bird76]

While this isn't good news for Boeing its outstanding news for Long Island since Grumman said they will be expanding their Long Island operation adding 1000 plus jobs if they go the contract. So this is wonderful news for Grumman and Long Island!

[Mateo]

Modern aircraft are built by many suppliers in many places, but the bottom line is that profits still go back to Toulouse. Just a couple of points on things that have already received replies, since caterwauling does little good now (I'm as angry as the next guy).

1.) Congress had nothing to do with this. It wasn't a Congressional vote; it was a Pentagon contract award. The voiding of the original award to Boeing was a Congressional action spearheaded by Sen. McCain.

2.) The reason foreign auto plants largely moved into the Southeast instead of the Midwest was the anti-union culture of the South. Instead of being built by unionized Boeing employees in Washington, the boxes will be opened and the assembly done in Alabama by presumably non-union factory workers.

3.) It remains to be seen if the jobs created by the A330 assembly in Mobile offset the jobs lost by the virtual end of the 767 line in Washington.

[cancidas]

while i feel a bit dissapointed, i have to support the USAF's decision. besides, that brings me a step closer to owning one of these badboys:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6156304

[moose135]

while i feel a bit dissapointed, i have to support the USAF's decision. besides, that brings me a step closer to owning one of these badboys:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6156304

You wish, Matt...this program is to replace the 150 or so KC-135E tankers, which are used by the ANG & Reserves. They are worn out, many don't even fly anymore, they just get moved around the ramp, but can't be retired yet. That R-model in the shot you posted won't be scheduled for replacement until at least 2045, and may still be flying in 2065.

[moose135]

While this isn't good news for Boeing its outstanding news for Long Island since Grumman said they will be expanding their Long Island operation adding 1000 plus jobs if they go the contract. So this is wonderful news for Grumman and Long Island!

You have a source on that information, Tommy? According to the Northrop/Grumman website of state-by-state economic impact, it doesn't include anything for New York. While the page notes the project will "employ 25,000 American workers at 230 U.S. companies in 49 states" and only details 20 of those states, they do include such small numbers as 150 in Arkansas, and 570 in Indiana. You would think they would want to publicize such a large number in a key state like NY.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/kc30/ben ... mpact.html

I can't get to the Newsday.com article (they are upgrading the website tonight) but the blurb from the story on Google says "Northrop Grumman's facility in Bethpage might have provided some engineering expertise, but few jobs were expected to be created on Long Island". I'll have to check it in the morning.

[Nonstop2AUH]

Some good backstory from the origins of all this in the article below, the key quote to me being:

"It's very partisan; the EADS support group is very Republican, and Boeing's is very Democratic," said Aboulafia.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... ker31.html

So it seems that while the decision was made by the Pentagon, politicians have been pushing this one direction or another for 5 years, to the extent they were even trying to influence the specs of the RFP.

And it seems to be a trend to award contracts for non-combat military aircraft to foreign bidders. Alenia won the JCA Joint Cargo Aircraft contract with a similar deal to work with a US partner and do assembly here, and the losing JCA bidder was a foreign-sourced aircraft as well - EADS C-295.

[T-Bird76]

While this isn't good news for Boeing its outstanding news for Long Island since Grumman said they will be expanding their Long Island operation adding 1000 plus jobs if they go the contract. So this is wonderful news for Grumman and Long Island!

You have a source on that information, Tommy? According to the Northrop/Grumman website of state-by-state economic impact, it doesn't include anything for New York. While the page notes the project will "employ 25,000 American workers at 230 U.S. companies in 49 states" and only details 20 of those states, they do include such small numbers as 150 in Arkansas, and 570 in Indiana. You would think they would want to publicize such a large number in a key state like NY.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/kc30/ben ... mpact.html

I can't get to the Newsday.com article (they are upgrading the website tonight) but the blurb from the story on Google says "Northrop Grumman's facility in Bethpage might have provided some engineering expertise, but few jobs were expected to be created on Long Island". I'll have to check it in the morning.

http://www.newsday.com/services/news...,2072608.story

Moose the jobs wouldn't just be Grumman jobs but the overall impact of new construction and the jobs that will create.

[Midnight Mike]

Well there goes my Boeing stock.

Will be interesting to hear the reasons, but, some hints are being released:

Air Force officials offered few details about why they choose the Northrop-EADS team over Boeing since they have yet to debrief the two companies. But Air Force Gen. Arthur Lichte said the larger size was key. "More passengers, more cargo, more fuel to offload," he said.

"It will be very hard for Boeing to overturn this decision because the Northrop plane seemed markedly superior" in the eyes of the Air Force, said Loren Thompson, a defense industry analyst with Lexington Institute, a policy think tank. And as the winners of the first award, EADS and Northrop are in a strong position to win two follow-on deals to build hundreds of more planes.

Looks like the Air Force wanted the bigger plane, wonder if Boeing was aware of this & did they offer up the 777?

[cancidas]

while i feel a bit dissapointed, i have to support the USAF's decision. besides, that brings me a step closer to owning one of these badboys:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6156304

You wish, Matt...this program is to replace the 150 or so KC-135E tankers, which are used by the ANG & Reserves. They are worn out, many don't even fly anymore, they just get moved around the ramp, but can't be retired yet. That R-model in the shot you posted won't be scheduled for replacement until at least 2045, and may still be flying in 2065.

i'll still be around then... still looking forward to delivery! :D

[PhilDernerJr]

I always thought the discussions they were just weak threats to say that they had "considered" other options, who thought they'd actually DO it. My only guess is that Boeing wasn't taking it seriously enough because of that and dropped the ball.

As said, absolutely shocking.

[Nick]

Interesting, and we really don't want the HH-47 either..

[Midnight Mike]

More hints:

Northrop and EADS officials have said a key selling point is the A330 Freighter’s market appeal, with 66 orders received in the past 12 months. This backlog should relieve any pressure on the USAF to sustain the production line for KC-X orders.

[moose135]

http://www.newsday.com/services/news...,2072608.story

Moose the jobs wouldn't just be Grumman jobs but the overall impact of new construction and the jobs that will create.

I don't see anything in that article about jobs related to the tanker, either at Grumman or otherwise. It does say

Tom Vice, the recently appointed head of Northrop Grumman's Long Island operations, said Monday night the company will expand on the Island if it wins certain key contracts, including one to help design electronics equipment for military aircraft, a company spokeswoman said yesterday.

In Newsday's article about the tanker deal, http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzgr ... 7774.story
it says:

It's not clear what work, if any, will be done at Northrop Grumman's Bethpage facility, where about 2,200 workers focus on early warning and radar support equipment for the Navy.

and

Northrop Grumman's facility in Bethpage might have provided some engineering expertise, but few jobs were expected to be created on Long Island out of the tanker deal, company officials privately acknowledged

I don't see this as a win for Long Island at all. And while most of the articles I've seen (no doubt due to AF spin) say "Northrop/Grumman" was awarded the contract, they will be basically a subcontractor for EADS/Airbus, assembling parts of a European-designed aircraft. Sorry, SAC would have never put up with this crap!