And AIRBUS are still dreaming they can break into the US defence market with the A400M?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...anker-bid.html

Doesnn't surprise me really, in bad times they were always going to back Boeing, though this may just be a tactical move by Northrop to get the rules changed to give them a better chance.

God I hate the Septics. They are a bunch of cheating bastards. They talk about fair competition when they are trying to sell their kit to anyone else, but when it comes to buying foreign they will find any tactic to win the order. The ironic thing is that the US content of the EADS A330 bid exceeds that of the Boing offering anyway (much of the Boing is made abroad (Japan for one).

They have done the same thing with the CSAR-X contract. the HH-71 (development of the Merlin) was by far the better product but the fiddled the tests (especially the one about the time taken to prepare for transport in a C17 (difficult for a Chinook as it doesn't have folding blades). The whole thing stinks.

Special relationship my arse. Its special for them its all one sided.... THEIRS!!!

Originally Posted by Salvador

God I hate the Septics. They are a bunch of cheating bastards. They talk about fair competition when they are trying to sell their kit to anyone else, but when it comes to buying foreign they will find any tactic to win the order. The ironic thing is that the US content of the EADS A330 bid exceeds that of the Boing offering anyway (much of the Boing is made abroad (Japan for one).

They have done the same thing with the CSAR-X contract. the HH-71 (development of the Merlin) was by far the better product but the fiddled the tests (especially the one about the time taken to prepare for transport in a C17 (difficult for a Chinook as it doesn't have folding blades). The whole thing stinks.

Special relationship my arse. Its special for them its all one sided.... THEIRS!!!

+1000 !

Makes me even happier the A-400M is going ahead.

By skewing the deal in favour of the B767, the US is losing out because they will end up with an inferior aircraft offering an inferior capability.

However, the Boeing 767 and Airbus A330 tankers are not that dissimilar, so the net loss militarily is not 'that' drastic. Financially, the US tax payer, in the round probably benefits.

On the otherhand, there is the A400M political jerry-mandering in Europe where the Euro tax payer is getting hammered just to polish gallic pride.

As Whitecity says, the various Aviation pundits have been saying for the last few years that the US seems to be determined to buy an inferior aircraft. It would appear they have suceeded. They will probably end up doing the same for their P-8 Maritime patrol aircraft and the bigger C-130 they are looking at.

One thing to remember is that as fas as most americans are concerned Airbus is french (though its only partially french). And france is associated with cowardice and surrender in the eyes of a lot of americans, especially over Gulf War 2: A Sons Vengence

So there will be all sorts of senators and what not demanding the american planes should be built by american people with american money. Woe betide any politician over there that wants to see american jobs go to french people.

Then again, how many procurements have the MOD done to secure british jobs? An example would be rather than upgrading Pumas and Lynxs why not just buy bloody Blackhawks! That would get choppers to the front a lot quicker than buying british, but no polititian want to sacrifice british jobs.

However dont accuse me of siding with the yanks on this one! Personally I think its a shame and could possibly have an affect on me. I used to work in the Airbus Broughton factory where they make the wings and have been looking at the possibility of returning, however with fewer orders this might not be good. Also i run my own business and have had many Airbus customes use my services and obviouslty the more there are, and the more secure their jobs are, the more chance I have of gaining work. Airbus and other support companies must be pretty much the biggest employer around here.

The essential difference in the helicopter/tanker analogy though, is that the B767 is actually a capable platform for the job in hand. It may not be the best (don't know to be honest, not familiar with the spec/requirement). Certainly in the case of the Army Lynx British forces are getting a markedly inferior (not for for purpose?) aircraft in the name of jobs for the boys.

I'm very much in favour of supporting indigenous industry, particularly in the defence sector, but only when the product is what is required by those who are going to be using it.

Originally Posted by Recruiting_Office_reject

As Whitecity says, the various Aviation pundits have been saying for the last few years that the US seems to be determined to buy an inferior aircraft. It would appear they have suceeded. They will probably end up doing the same for their P-8 Maritime patrol aircraft and the bigger C-130 they are looking at.

Boeing wanted the USAF to buy the 767 because the 767 production line was about to shut down as the planes run it's course and there is no more commercial interest in an obsolete mid range airliner.

The USAF doesn't even want the 767 for much the same reasons airlines turned their noses up at it, it's narrow oval fuselage bulks out before you can fill it up with pallets. This may be a problem as the USAF were rather looking at the big airlift capability of the KC-45, 32 pallets, (the KC-767 can only fit in 19), being a very good answer to their general run of the mill palleted cargo hauling needs.

I heard Airbus declined to enter the contest for the replacement Air Force One aircraft. Would have cost too much to make two A380 sales, even considering the massive kick in the nacelles to Boeing that having POTUS flying in an Airbus would represent.

I also heard that USAF are considering buying A380 freighters. How would those compare with existing military cargo planes? Bigger than a 747 freighter and carries more weight than one of those C5 galaxy thingies but, I understand, less than ideal for carrying military cargo. Looks like Boeing could be suffering la grande humiliation after all.