Alabama Wins Again: Northrup Grumman Wins Tanker Contract

GulfCoastTider · February 29th, 2008, 04:00 PM

Tidewater · February 29th, 2008, 05:02 PM

	Quote:	GulfCoastTider
	Chicago Sun Times The Hill

Good news for Mobile.
Having spoken to RAF pilots who flew the Eurofighter (a joint European coop product), the ability of the Europeans to get it together in a timely and economical fashion is suspect. If one country's union decides to go on strike (which is almost an daily occurrence it seems) the delivery of the tankers to Mobile for final assembly could be at risk.

ga_tide_fan · March 3rd, 2008, 08:14 AM

This decision by the Air Force hurt the company I work for tremndously. We were expecting to get some of the off shoot work from Boeing and had been advised by most of the lobbyists in D.C. that Boeing was their number one choice. Instead it goes to Airbus and the French. The French are notorious for their strikes and Holidays. This project will take twice as long to complete and cost more money in the long run in my opinion. Of course, I am a biased loser in this deal.

It's On A Slab · March 3rd, 2008, 08:18 AM

	Quote:	ga_tide_fan
	This decision by the Air Force hurt the company I work for tremndously. We were expecting to get some of the off shoot work from Boeing and had been advised by most of the lobbyists in D.C. that Boeing was their number one choice. Instead it goes to Airbus and the French. The French are notorious for their strikes and Holidays. This project will take twice as long to complete and cost more money in the long run in my opinion. Of course, I am a biased loser in this deal.

I'm really curious as to why Boeing got the short end of the stick on this one.

derek4tide · March 3rd, 2008, 08:39 AM

Starting to sound like Boeing took the contract (and the customer) for granted. They broke rule # 1 in salesmanship - Listen to the customer. The Air Force wanted a larger tanker and Boeing offered a smaller one, while Northrup offered a larger one. Overall, I think it sucks that American Air Force pilots will be flying European equipment.

From Seattle's KOMO-TV 3/3/2008:
http://www.komotv.com/news/local/16166362.html

	Quote:
	Four years ago, the Chicago-based company lost a contract to lease 100 tankers to the Air Force after an investigation led to charges of illegal dealings between a top executive and a chief Air Force weapons buyer, putting both in prison. It was a black eye for Boeing and led to a hefty $615 million settlement. It also changed the dynamic between Boeing and the world's biggest buyer of military planes.

Tidewater · March 3rd, 2008, 08:43 AM

	Quote:	ga_tide_fan
	This decision by the Air Force hurt the company I work for tremndously. We were expecting to get some of the off shoot work from Boeing and had been advised by most of the lobbyists in D.C. that Boeing was their number one choice. Instead it goes to Airbus and the French. The French are notorious for their strikes and Holidays. This project will take twice as long to complete and cost more money in the long run in my opinion. Of course, I am a biased loser in this deal.

I surely hope that the contract was written in such a way that Airbus will pay (hopefully through the nose) for delays in delivery of the aircraft and that Airbus will eat cost over-runs.

Why am I skeptical?

Displaced Bama Fan · March 3rd, 2008, 11:00 AM

Ok, Alabama has new steel mills, automobile plants, ship builiding and now aerospace manufacturing capabilities...hmmmm. Maybe it is time to move home. It sounds like they are putting in the infrastructure to withdraw from the union and have the manufacturing capability to defend itself.

I like it.

(said tongue in cheek of course)

Displaced Bama Fan · March 3rd, 2008, 11:02 AM

	Quote:	Tidewater
	I surely hope that the contract was written in such a way that Airbus will pay (hopefully through the nose) for delays in delivery of the aircraft and that Airbus will eat cost over-runs. Why am I skeptical?

The government doesn't have cost overruns. They are built in to fund hidden projects. Come on man, you know better than that.

It's On A Slab · March 3rd, 2008, 11:02 AM

	Quote:	HuntsvilleTider
	Starting to sound like Boeing took the contract (and the customer) for granted. They broke rule # 1 in salesmanship - Listen to the customer. The Air Force wanted a larger tanker and Boeing offered a smaller one, while Northrup offered a larger one. Overall, I think it sucks that American Air Force pilots will be flying European equipment. From Seattle's KOMO-TV 3/3/2008: http://www.komotv.com/news/local/16166362.html

Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten about that lease-deal/scandal.

Tidewater · March 3rd, 2008, 11:18 AM

	Quote:	Displaced Bama Fan
	The government doesn't have cost overruns. They are built in to fund hidden projects. Come on man, you know better than that.

Man, I wish you could have heard what the RAF pilots told me about the Eurofighter. I kid you not, the left wing is made in one country, the right in another. The engine is made one place, the turbine blades in another. When the workers in Spain go on strike, the whole assembly stops. When the ones in France strike (which is something of a national pasttime in France), the assembly stops.
And, here's the brilliant point, if any one buyer cancels his order (I think it is the UK, France, Spain, Italy), that country has to pay more in penalties than it would cost to buy the planes.
It is a great airplane, it is just horribly expensive and I am not sure who it is designed to defeat (neither are the pilots I spoke to).

As for the tankers, I just hope that the US contact writers built a huge financial penalty for when the Europeans workers go on strike (which they will) and can't provide the aircraft on time.