With the government’s announcement last week that Boeing was the winner of a $35 billion project to build a new aerial refueling tanker, there was joy here in the company’s Chicago headquarters. There was even more happiness in Washington state and Kansas, where most of the manufacturing of the giant planes will be done.
But in Alabama, where the firm competing for the project would have built its version of the tankers, some were blaming President Obama’s ties to Chicago.
“Only Chicago politics could tip the scales in favor of Boeing’s inferior plane,” fumed Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).
The plane proposed by European Aeronautic Defence and Space (EADS) “clearly offers the more capable aircraft,” said Shelby. “If this decision stands, our warfighters will not get the superior equipment they deserve.’’
U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) said he would demand a “full accounting” of why EADS, the parent company of Airbus, lost the tanker contract.
The Financial Times quoted Peter Hintze, Germany’s parliamentary state secretary responsible for the aerospace industry at the economy ministry: “I am afraid that in addition to purely military and financial factors, questions of the industrial location of production could also have played a role,” he said.
EADS officials will meet with the U.S. Air Force on Monday for a debriefing and will take up to 10 days to decide whether to appeal.
But Pentagon officials defended the decision, saying while both bids met its 372 mandatory requirements, the Boeing bid was more than 1 percent cheaper and was the “clear winner.’’
But in Alabama, where the firm competing for the project would have built its version of the tankers, some were blaming President Obama’s ties to Chicago.
“Only Chicago politics could tip the scales in favor of Boeing’s inferior plane,” fumed Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).
The plane proposed by European Aeronautic Defence and Space (EADS) “clearly offers the more capable aircraft,” said Shelby. “If this decision stands, our warfighters will not get the superior equipment they deserve.’’
U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) said he would demand a “full accounting” of why EADS, the parent company of Airbus, lost the tanker contract.
The Financial Times quoted Peter Hintze, Germany’s parliamentary state secretary responsible for the aerospace industry at the economy ministry: “I am afraid that in addition to purely military and financial factors, questions of the industrial location of production could also have played a role,” he said.
EADS officials will meet with the U.S. Air Force on Monday for a debriefing and will take up to 10 days to decide whether to appeal.
But Pentagon officials defended the decision, saying while both bids met its 372 mandatory requirements, the Boeing bid was more than 1 percent cheaper and was the “clear winner.’’
It will also save money on fuel, U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, a Democrat from Washington state who pushed for Boeing to get the contract, told the Seattle Times. The EADS tanker was much bigger and burns about 24 percent more fuel than Boeing’s. The difference in fuel costs over 40 years “was billions of dollars,” Dicks told the Times.
And officials in Kansas, which stands to gain 7,500 new jobs and an estimated $388 million, also defended the deal. “This is good for America. This is good for our community” said Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer, a former Boeing engineer.
This is the third try over a 10-year period at replacing the KC-135. The first was a costly plan to lease 767s from Boeing that was killed because of a conflict of interest between a top Air Force official and a Boeing executive.
And officials in Kansas, which stands to gain 7,500 new jobs and an estimated $388 million, also defended the deal. “This is good for America. This is good for our community” said Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer, a former Boeing engineer.
This is the third try over a 10-year period at replacing the KC-135. The first was a costly plan to lease 767s from Boeing that was killed because of a conflict of interest between a top Air Force official and a Boeing executive.
The Government Accountability Office overturned a second try at awarding a contract, this time to a consortium of EADS and Northrop, because of “significant errors” in the bidding process.
The KC-135 is, in aviation years, an antique. The first KC-135 was delivered in 1957 and the last one in 1965. The KC-135 was was largely out of domestic service by the mid-1980s.
These “flying gas stations,” as they’re sometimes described, are considered vital to the nation’s ability to project air power and sustain operations in remote theaters like Afghanistan and Iraq.
The Air Force has awarded Boeing an initial contract of $3.5 billion to engineer and manufacture the first four tankers, a design based on its 767. That is the first installment in the $35 billion program to build 179 tankers. The deal could potentially be worth $100 billion if the Air Force decides to build more. AP
The KC-135 is, in aviation years, an antique. The first KC-135 was delivered in 1957 and the last one in 1965. The KC-135 was was largely out of domestic service by the mid-1980s.
These “flying gas stations,” as they’re sometimes described, are considered vital to the nation’s ability to project air power and sustain operations in remote theaters like Afghanistan and Iraq.
The Air Force has awarded Boeing an initial contract of $3.5 billion to engineer and manufacture the first four tankers, a design based on its 767. That is the first installment in the $35 billion program to build 179 tankers. The deal could potentially be worth $100 billion if the Air Force decides to build more. AP
No comments:
Post a Comment