Airbus tankers for USAF?

As of last week, Lockheed Martin and EADS, majority owner of Airbus,
were assembling a tanker proposal that would give Lockheed a 50% offset,
according to the Air Force official. "[Airbus] clearly will jump on this
as an opportunity to compete not only on subsequent buys, but also to
take another whack at the first 100 since Boeing and the Air Force are
arguing over whether there's supposed to be one contract or two.
[Airbus] will come back with a sweetened deal."

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...s/12013wna.xml

"noname" wrote in message
...
As of last week, Lockheed Martin and EADS, majority owner of Airbus,
were assembling a tanker proposal that would give Lockheed a 50% offset,
according to the Air Force official. "[Airbus] clearly will jump on this
as an opportunity to compete not only on subsequent buys, but also to
take another whack at the first 100 since Boeing and the Air Force are
arguing over whether there's supposed to be one contract or two.
[Airbus] will come back with a sweetened deal."


http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...s/12013wna.xml

Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw quite a bit of political
support; Boxer needs to save her job.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
| "noname" wrote in message
| ...
| As of last week, Lockheed Martin and EADS, majority owner of
Airbus,
| were assembling a tanker proposal that would give Lockheed a 50%
offset,
| according to the Air Force official. "[Airbus] clearly will jump on
this
| as an opportunity to compete not only on subsequent buys, but also
to
| take another whack at the first 100 since Boeing and the Air Force
are
| arguing over whether there's supposed to be one contract or two.
| [Airbus] will come back with a sweetened deal."
|
|
|
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...s/12013wna.xml
|
| Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw quite a bit of
political
| support; Boxer needs to save her job.

And proposing to put the 50% offset in Texas, Georgia, South Carolina or
anywhere but California could ensure that Boxer loses her job.

"Brett" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
| "noname" wrote in message
| ...
| As of last week, Lockheed Martin and EADS, majority owner of
Airbus,
| were assembling a tanker proposal that would give Lockheed a 50%
offset,
| according to the Air Force official. "[Airbus] clearly will jump on
this
| as an opportunity to compete not only on subsequent buys, but also
to
| take another whack at the first 100 since Boeing and the Air Force
are
| arguing over whether there's supposed to be one contract or two.
| [Airbus] will come back with a sweetened deal."
|
|
|

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...s/12013wna.xml
|
| Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw quite a bit of
political
| support; Boxer needs to save her job.

And proposing to put the 50% offset in Texas, Georgia, South Carolina or
anywhere but California could ensure that Boxer loses her job.

Excellent.

A fine slab of Georgia pork.

Then we could kill the F-22 with very little political cost and ramp the
F-35 in Texas.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw quite a bit of political
support; Boxer needs to save her job.

And Bush will save her?

Boeing, Boeing, gone
http://www.economist.com/agenda/disp...ory_id=2260617

OK, if by 2010 the Super Hornet is the last tanker platform left in
the US Military, will they put a refueling probe on the front of the
B2? (I suppose the Marines will have some KC-130Js also if the Air
Force can't buy any more tankers. ;-)

-HJC

Remember the first round of BRAC??? Dellums and Feinstein ****ed
everyone off so much for years that the commission closed down the
whole Bay Area!! I would hope that Boxers' name never even comes close
to the BRAC equation during the next round........

On 1 Dec 2003 21:19:50 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw quite a bit of political
support; Boxer needs to save her job.

And Bush will save her?

Boeing, Boeing, gone
http://www.economist.com/agenda/disp...ory_id=2260617

OK, if by 2010 the Super Hornet is the last tanker platform left in
the US Military, will they put a refueling probe on the front of the
B2? (I suppose the Marines will have some KC-130Js also if the Air
Force can't buy any more tankers. ;-)

-HJC

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"noname" wrote in message
...
As of last week, Lockheed Martin and EADS,
majority owner of Airbus,
were assembling a tanker proposal that would
give Lockheed a 50% offset,
according to the Air Force official. "[Airbus]
clearly will jump on this
as an opportunity to compete not only on subsequent
buys, but also to
take another whack at the first 100 since
Boeing and the Air Force are
arguing over whether there's supposed to be
one contract or two.
[Airbus] will come back with a sweetened deal."


http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...s/12013wna.xml

Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw
quite a bit of political
support; Boxer needs to save her job.


Yes, but still, the Not Invented Here syndrome kicks in: The AF (and the
rest of DOD) would prefer to buy a product marked "Made in USA" unless there
is no other choice. (B-57 Canberra and AV-8 Harrier are obvious examples)Even
a proposed Tornado Wild Weasel that would've been built at Rockwell International's
Palmdale plant would have run into this problem.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

On or about Tue, 02 Dec 2003 15:19:32 GMT, "Matt Wiser"
allegedly uttered:

Yes, but still, the Not Invented Here syndrome kicks in: The AF (and the
rest of DOD) would prefer to buy a product marked "Made in USA" unless there
is no other choice. (B-57 Canberra and AV-8 Harrier are obvious examples)Even
a proposed Tornado Wild Weasel that would've been built at Rockwell International's
Palmdale plant would have run into this problem.

With the USAF you'd have a point, but for the Army and USMC........

M249 - Belgian
M240 - Belgian
M9 - Italian
MK 23 - German (arguably)
81mm mortar - UK
105mm gun - UK
155mm gun UK (the new experimental one)
120mm tank gun - German
AT-4 - Scandinavian (Norwegian?)
Land Rover - UK (Used by the Rangers)

There's probably others, but I can't recall them off hand.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

"Henry J. Cobb" wrote in message
om...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...
Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw quite a bit of political
support; Boxer needs to save her job.

And Bush will save her?

Boeing, Boeing, gone
http://www.economist.com/agenda/disp...ory_id=2260617

OK, if by 2010 the Super Hornet is the last tanker platform left in
the US Military, will they put a refueling probe on the front of the
B2? (I suppose the Marines will have some KC-130Js also if the Air
Force can't buy any more tankers. ;-)

The anouncement today that the OSP (space plane) is delayed potentially
pulls another $13 billion out of Southern California.

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
news:3fccadf9$1@bg2....

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"noname" wrote in message
...
As of last week, Lockheed Martin and EADS,
majority owner of Airbus,
were assembling a tanker proposal that would
give Lockheed a 50% offset,
according to the Air Force official. "[Airbus]
clearly will jump on this
as an opportunity to compete not only on subsequent
buys, but also to
take another whack at the first 100 since
Boeing and the Air Force are
arguing over whether there's supposed to be
one contract or two.
[Airbus] will come back with a sweetened deal."



http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...id=news/12013w
na.xml

Completing those tankers at Palmdale would draw
quite a bit of political
support; Boxer needs to save her job.


Yes, but still, the Not Invented Here syndrome kicks in: The AF (and the
rest of DOD) would prefer to buy a product marked "Made in USA" unless
there
is no other choice. (B-57 Canberra and AV-8 Harrier are obvious
examples)Even
a proposed Tornado Wild Weasel that would've been built at Rockwell
International's
Palmdale plant would have run into this problem.

With a 50% offset, it is argueable that the airplanes are American.