Reply With Quote
What's funny?
I thought it was one of a reference, frankly.
's about right.
What's funny?
I thought it was one of a reference, frankly.
I have no specific knowledge of particular parts of or particular plants, just a basic understanding that aircraft, like automobiles, are not manufactured in one location.
I based my "bulk of Boeing in Cali and Washington" on the numbers in in this wiki article (3000 in Kansas as opposed to 28,000 in Cali and 74,000 in Washington). The Integrated Defense Division employs 71,000 total, so I think it's safe to assume that these tankers aren't going to be built completely from scratch by 3000 Kansans.
The EADS stuff is just what I remembered when I heard this story on NPR.
No, I don't really care one way or the other. I just wanted to point out that the state of Georgia was getting it's back scratched in all of this.
Fair enough.
I wouldn't assume, however, that many parts for the Airbus are not ALSO manufactured in this country. US labor is not appreciably more expensive than French, afterall. Making parts (especially I assume big-ass aircraft parts) near the point of assembly would seem to be economically responsible.
Pelosi is not looking out for what's good for American, any more than any other politician in this. California Democrat is how she rolls (and gets reelected with a nut-burger anti-war freak running against her)
Actually, US labor is considerable less expensive than French labor (again, according to the story I heard on NPR) so this is Airbus's way of outsourcing and saving labor costs.
btw, I've already spent way too much non-work time on this board today, but I'll try and find links on this whole Airbus/Georgia aspect of this story later on.
No arguement here.
Last edited by PixelPusher; 03-07-2008 at 02:42 PM.
OK, let me get this right.
McCain has a roll in this because there are under the table deals going on, and he's the bad guy?
This is an interesting debate that has absolutely nothing to do with John McCain...
It's actually really simple. Air Force Acquisitions officers are taught to measure against three variables; cost, schedule and performance. Clearly the lead for this Air Force development program decided EADS could deliver a lower cost, higher quality product in a shorter time.
It should be pointed out that job creation does NOT enter into the equation during this process. And I find it funny that senators are going to bat for poor little ol' Boeing, when they've got plenty of work to keep them busy (i.e. F-15's for Singapore).
But, I've actually talked to a Boeing guy who tells me the AF initially gave a no-go to the Boeing 777 in favor of the 767, then changed the requirements do ent mid-stream that would've made the 777 the preference. I gotta get some more info from him on Monday, but I actually consider this guy to be credible and not necessarily a "company man".
If he shares anything interesting, I'll let you know...
Regardless of McCain's role, or lack thereof, in this, something stinks.
The Airbus entry, the KC-45 is a derivative of the A330, a plane that is superior to Boeing's 767, no surprise it beat out the Boeing Entry (KC-767). The problem is, once figures are finalized, the KC-45 will come in some 50 to 80 Million Dollars/unit more expensive than the KC-767. If the Air Force was willing to spend that kind of money, the 777 comes into play.
It's as if RFP's went out with two different sets of specs.
Or the specs were changed during the acquisition process, which is what my guy at Boeing implied. But I have to get more details from him...
Is that the projected LRIP cost difference or the cost difference once the production line is rolling them out on a regular basis?
I wonder what the Boing guys in Gresham have to say about this?
Maybe I'll go hookup with a bartender friend I have where they go after work and see what she knows.
"absolutely nothing to do with John McCain"
McCain was involved in uncovering the Boeing fraud.
Boeing and its employees are now going after McCain for that very involvement.
Seems like a lot of people think McCain is involved.
McCain was at the forefront of the Darlene Druyun story, but I don't believe he's made a comment about the controversy of this story...outsourcing of military tanker aircraft contract to builder of Airbus.
Boeing officially announced that it will file a protest with the GAO, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was on these grounds, alleging some ambiguity in the proposed capabilities and functionality of the tanker.
After all I've heard, I can't say I blame them.
To land $35B in contracts, Boeing can sic a lot of their corporate lawyers on the DoD.
If Boeing wins, they'll end up charging/hiding those legals fees to DoD/taxpayer as part of the absolutely invevitable "overruns".
We need those tankers to go after ragheads with AK47s, RPGs, IEDs.
Last edited by boutons_; 03-11-2008 at 05:32 PM.
Oh, well. At least he gets a nice door prize for his troubles.
Not that I think $15K and a red state gubernatorial endorsement will be the difference in his Presidential bid, but it's good to see the other shoe dropped.McCain Recieved Defense Firm Cash After Backing Its Contract
Critics on Tuesday questioned whether Sen. John McCain catered to special interests when he aggressively threw his support behind a $35 billion Pentagon contract for a European plane maker.
McCain, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, played a crucial role in blocking the deal to build air tankers from going to U.S.-based Boeing, instead paving the path for EADS to score the loot. He framed his decision as an example of political integrity; Boeing has previously been exposed of contract abuse. But a review of campaign finance donations and lobbying records suggests that money and personal lobbying may have also been in play.
On January 15, 2007, McCain appeared at Alabama Gov. Bob Riley's gubernatorial swearing in ceremony and formally called for multiple bidders in the tanker deal. The push for an open process had only one true beneficiary, however, and that was the Northrop Grumman/EADS consortium, which was poised to be Boeing's sole compe or.
A day after McCain made his proclamation, the contributions began to flow. John Green, a lobbyist for EADS donated $2,100 to the senator's presidential campaign. Ten days after that, Mic e Lammers, the "Chief of Staff" for EADS North America, gave $250 to the McCain campaign. It was her first political contribution ever. Less than a month later, the long-time head of EADS' government affairs program, Samuel Ad , made a $2,100 donation to McCain. And eleven days later, Ralph Crosby, the head of EADS North America, donated $2,300 himself.
All told, as do ented earlier by CQ PoliticalMoneyline, McCain received more than $15,000 from EADS and its subsidiary, Airbus North America. Not only was this the highest amount received by any federal candidate, but prior to 2006, not a single employee from EADS had ever contributed to McCain. Two Airbus employees did donate nearly $4,000 for his 2000 run at the White House.
"It has a bad appearance," said Phillip Finnegan, the director of corporate analysis at The Teal Group, a market analysis and consulting firm. "Clearly, companies contribute to members of congress who are sympathetic with there position. But it doesn't necessarily mean that it influences their position... McCain is a bit of a crusader. And when he has an issue like he had with Boeing, he pursues it. But [the contributions] definitely doesn't look good."
Finnegan was referring to McCain's 2003 investigation into Boeing's billing practices and lock on the tanker business. That investigation resulted in the company losing out on a $23 billion deal to lease tankers to the Air Force. On Friday, McCain defended both his current and past positions: "I never weighed in for or against anybody that competed for the contract. All I asked for was a fair process. And the facts are that I never showed any bias in any way against anybody -- except for the taxpayer."
But there are myriad signs that EADS curried up to the Arizona Senator. And it wasn't just the money. According to an Associated Press report published on Tuesday, the McCain campaign currently employs individuals who just last year were lobbying on behalf of EADS.
"Two of the advisers gave up their lobbying work when they joined McCain's campaign," the AP wrote. "A third, former Texas Rep. Tom Loeffler, lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. while serving as McCain's national finance chairman."
One of those advisers, John Green, left Ogilvy Government Relations to become McCain's congressional Republican liaison shortly after the EADS deal was announced.
"They never lobbied him related to the issues, and the letters went out before they were contracted" by EADS, McCain campaign spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker told the AP.
In the end, McCain may have received more than just campaign contributions in return for his support of the EADS contract. Parts for the refueling tankers are slated to be built in Mobile, Alabama. And just days after the deal was finalized, the state's governor, Bob Riley -- a long holdout in the presidential process -- finally offered his endorsement of McCain's candidacy.
"To say this is a great day for Alabama is a monumental understatement," Riley said of the contract. "This will go down in history as one of our greatest days."
...and FWIW, I still don't have a dog in this MIC turf war.
Last edited by PixelPusher; 03-11-2008 at 09:29 PM.
An update, the GAO has sided with Boeing and urged the Air Force to rerun it's Bid for next generation tanker aircraft.
Auditors Sustain Boeing ProtestWASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. auditors urged the Air Force Wednesday to rerun its marathon, $35 billion compe ion for refueling aircraft, upholding a protest by losing bidder Boeing Co.
The Government Accountability Office found the Air Force made "a number of significant errors that could have affected the outcome of what was a close compe ion between" Boeing and Northrop Grumman Corp.
"We therefore sustained Boeing's protest," Michael Golden, head of the a GAO bid protest unit, said in a statement.
Northrop was teamed with EADS, parent of rival passenger-jet maker Airbus. EADS had no immediate comment.
Boeing shares briefly ed up 2 percent on the news, but pared those gains to less than 1 percent on the New York Stock Exchange. Northrop shares were down 1.4 percent in mid-afternoon trade.
"The Air Force is aware of the Government Accountability Office's report and will review the findings and recommendations. We will release a statement this afternoon," said Air Force spokeswoman Maj. Dayan Araujo.
The Air Force "conducted misleading and unequal discussions with Boeing" by telling the company it had fully satisfied a key performance criteria, then later determining that Boeing had only partially met the objective, the GAO said.
I hate Pelosi. She will probably go down in history as the leader of one worst Congress this country has ever seen.
I understand McCain is being controlled by the beer industry. Reckon there is any truth to that.
Let me see, good looking blond, nice figure, hugh amounts of money and has a beer distributorship. Hot, damn, he ought to be President.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
