Airbus defeated Boeing to U.S. Air Force contract

Video Title :	Airbus defeated Boeing to U.S. Air Force contract
Description :	In a surprise win, Northrop Grumman and the parent company of Europe's Airbus has snared a contract worth up to $US40 billion ($43 billion) to build the US Air Force's next fleet of refuelling tankers. The Air Force's decision deals a major blow to Boeing while giving Europe's largest aerospace company a landmark foothold in the US military market. Boeing was heavily favoured to win the contract. It had been on the verge of sewing up a similar tanker deal in 2001, only to see it unravel after the revelation that a top Boeing official had conducted illegal job negotiations with an Air Force acquisition official who later joined the company. That thrust Boeing into a long ethics scandal, and the US put the contract up for rebidding. Besides being a strategic coup for Los Angeles-based Northrop, the victory is a personal vindication for Northrop chairman and chief executive Ronald Sugar, who agonised for a long time before teaming up with European Aeronautic Defence and& Space, which owns Airbus. Northrop officials worried that the unprecedented alliance with a foreign company could antagonise officials in the Pentagon and at other major US defence contractors. Northrop is a big supplier to other US aerospace firms. From the beginning, EADS and Northrop officials felt they were underdogs in the competition. Some had said they hoped, at best, that the Government would split its purchase between Boeing and Northrop. Even in the last few days, some of them tried to play down the chances of a win, talking instead about long-term opportunities to compete for a later batch of orders. Boeing's backers in Congress immediately went on the offensive. "I am frustrated, angry and shocked at this announcement," said Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington state. She had just been talking to Boeing workers on the 767 tanker line in her state when the bad news came. Air Force acquisitions official Sue Payton told a news conference that "Northrop Grumman clearly provided the best value to the government". Ms Payton cited the Northrop-EADS plane's aerial refuelling capabilities, its ability to haul cargo and its cost. She declined to go into details about why Boeing's proposal did not win, but said "there was absolutely no bias in this award". Northrop and EADS have contracted to build up to 179 tankers based on the Airbus A330 jetliner. The first planes are expected to enter service in 2013, replacing aircraft in the Air Force's ageing fleet of KC-135 tankers, many of which have been in service for more than 40 years. Eventually, the government expects to spend billions more dollars to replace more than 500 tankers. At Boeing, the world's largest aerospace company, executives now must figure out why it lost one of the Air Force's premier contracts and how it will defend the rest of its military business. Boeing's top defence executive, Jim Albaugh, oversaw the company's bid. Boeing said it was "very disappointed". After studying the move, the company "will make a decision concerning our possible options", it said. The loss could hasten the shutdown of the Boeing 767 jetliner production line in Everett, Washington. After years of losing out in commercial competitions to the larger Airbus A330, Boeing decided to replace the 767 with the 787 Dreamliner, which is now in development and has received 857 orders. Although the company has received a few orders in the past few years from customers desperate for widebody planes, the backlog of unfilled orders for the 767 stands at 51, which equates to roughly two years of production at current rates. Meanwhile, problems with the 787 have made that program nine months late. Few in the defence industry expect the Air Force decision to stand without protest. A refuelling tanker is an aircraft modified to carry large quantities of fuel that can be transferred in flight to smaller aeroplanes such as fighters, either through a pipe from the tail or from hoses that trail from pods on the tanker's wings. The Northrop/EADS plane can carry 170,000 litres of fuel, 32,000 more than Boeing's jet, as well as 220 people, 30 more than Boeing's. Northrop is the prime contractor on the plane, and EADS is the main subcontractor. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,23306755-36375,00.html?from=public_rss
Views :	4816
Rating :	4.12
Keywords, Tags :	Airbus beats Boeing to U.S. Army contract
Video Length :	2 : 37

Comments :

Well, what can you say!? Northrop Grumman/EADS worked their asses off to get this contract, all the while Boeing sat back on their asses thinking they were entitled to it and it was just going to get dropped into their plate! And these GAO "findings" are a far reaching and penny-ante to say the least Sorry Boeing, you are a sore loser deluxe! You lost, get over it!

After all the crying they've done, in some ways I wish Boeing does win the tanker competition. At least it might stop them spreading lies and propoganda. It would be funny to see them stumbling through the development process like they have with Italy (4 years late/0 delivered) and Japan (2 years late/2 delivered/0 in service). After all, Boeing's tanker design for the USAF hasn't actually been built and proved yet. If they won it would be the Italy/Japan delayed tanker fiasco all over again!

americans are sore losers

hahaha! u really pissed of the yanks there! as soon as airbus came out, boeing didnt give a shit about them. now, they KNOW that airbus is better. airbus made the future of flight with the fly-by-wire technology, and boeing had to follow that with the 777.

They have now canceled the contract after boeing had complained and have started a new bidding round! Looks like there still going to give it to boeing! Pathetic.

fuck off ur just pissed that the US cant make a better plane.

indeed, they are just jealous!

yep they cant make an airplane better than airbus!

Please explain to me that US cant make a better plane? Everybody on the EADS/NG side keep saying their airplane is better without any further explantion. Just saying bigger is better because it can haul more fuel and cargo, and nothing else.

dude are ya fuckin blind? boeing is based on 1960s technology, airbus is going with 2008 technology. also, they dont have the annoying central control column. plus, i heard in the news today that the airforce aint going to by that boeing pice of shit.