• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

42 Comments Airbus/Northrop Threat Revealing

Its a no brainer. The 767 wins by a land slide.

Sounds like Airbus almost got the deal through some 'under the table' activities, as usual...

Boeing and America need the work. Thats my humble two cents..

Bill
 
I dont understand how this could even be an issue or why theyd even consider letting another country bid on this.
 
There are some in Congress, in committees that control these things, that are opposed to awarding a major government contract without "competitive" bids. In practice, I can understand why you wouldn't want to give out contracts to a single bidder but if that's their concern then compare the current Boeing bid with it's previous bid and determine whether any changes in bottom line are justified/reasonable.

If Boeing is ready to build, give them the contract. Maintaining our own defense manufacturing assets and the national economy are just as much a part of "defense" as the tankers are.
 
This all started here:
Congress killed an earlier $23.5 billion Air Force plan to lease 100 Boeing 767 tankers amid a procurement scandal that sent two former Boeing officials to prison and prompted the resignation of two senior Air Force officials.


The pendulum probably swung a little too far the other way in trying to make amends... defense contracting is a dirty business.
 
It's too bad that Lockheed's not still in the airliner business. Not just because of what the L-1011 might have evolved into by now, but because of what that aircraft might be capable of in a Tanker role.
 
I've read that Northrop is posturing. Whatever it is, it's certain to cause yet another delay in a very, very, long delayed program.

I was hoping that the Dreamliner would've been roped into the tanker program, much like the 720/707 got roped into the KC-135 program.
 
Railrunner130 said:
I've read that Northrop is posturing. Whatever it is, it's certain to cause yet another delay in a very, very, long delayed program.

I was hoping that the Dreamliner would've been roped into the tanker program, much like the 720/707 got roped into the KC-135 program.
Click to expand...

The KC-135 came before the 707. The original dash 80 is what the KC-135 is based on. 707s and KC-135s don't even share many common parts.
 
Take the A330 -> improve runway infrastructure -> be able to operate the KC-10 from those runways as well -> increased flexiblity -> awesome.
 
Well... I wonder who Boeing paid off this time? LOL!

Ten years from now we may know the story. Whether we will have new tankers is another matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top