Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Northrop/EADS Beats Boeing For Tanker Contract / KC-45 Contract Awarded

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Jet-fighters.Net
    Not to make this an A Vs. B war.

    I honestly feel that the USAF blew there descision on the tanker choice as the A330 really has only 40,000 Lb fuel capacity greater than the 767. If you look back to the KC-135 the AF had the ability to purchase old 707 airframes out of scrap yard to keep the KC-135 fleet operating for 50+ years. With the 767 they can do the same as some airlines are starting to send older 767's for storage. With a newer airframe like the A-330 the amount of airframes headed to storage are next to nil and less likely to be purchased by the AF at bargain prices.
    but surely tht is one reason y they choose the A330 becasue of its large cargo capicaty over the 767??

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by AerLingusA330
      jst curious but are either r u or landing-gear from Northern Ireland... because terrisom was the biggest thing in this small country fro 40 years, and i doubt the americans were supporting the IRA and paramiltaries during the 40years of pure blood shed and bruttel killings all becasue the british thought it wud be rite to invade a helpless country and start killing for no reason, reminds u a bit of wat america is doing atm with the middle east stealing there oil tht isnt there etc...

      Get BUSH out and MIND YOUR OWN BLOODY BUISNESS, this is y the americans arent liked tht much
      This is really off topic here, and I'm not going to comment on your opinions, but could you please please please use capitalization, punctuation, and spell out your words correctly? This is not a text message. Your profile says you're nearly 18 so there's no reason to type like that anymore..

      Comment


      • #78
        Perhaps he is texting from an internet-connected cell phone.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Verbal
          Perhaps he is texting from an internet-connected cell phone.
          If he's going to type worlds like "paramiltaries" and "bruttel" then I don't see how typing out "you" and "are" is that much extra work...

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by AerLingusA330
            jst curious but are either r u or landing-gear from Northern Ireland... because terrisom was the biggest thing in this small country fro 40 years, and i doubt the americans were supporting the IRA and paramiltaries during the 40years of pure blood shed and bruttel killings all becasue the british thought it wud be rite to invade a helpless country and start killing for no reason, reminds u a bit of wat america is doing atm with the middle east stealing there oil tht isnt there etc...

            Get BUSH out and MIND YOUR OWN BLOODY BUISNESS, this is y the americans arent liked tht much
            I have great difficulty in following your point, given the way you write, but I further elaborated on the point in Post #63. I can assure I lived very closely to the fall-out from much of the Northern Irish civil war throughout its worst periods.

            ....."landing gear from Northern Ireland" - what on earth do you mean ?

            Comment


            • #81
              Could you plz try to stay on topic. This is not the place for an Airbus vs. Boeing war, nor the place for a Europe vs. America war.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by AerLingusA330
                british thought it wud be rite to invade a helpless country and start killing for no reason
                I suggest you read your history books AGAIN carefully, and even maybe continue your ranting on another more appropriate forum. We are talking aviation matters here.
                “If you shoot for the stars and hit the moon, it's OK. But you've got to shoot for something. A lot of people don't even shoot.”
                Confucius

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by HalcyonDays
                  ....."landing gear from Northern Ireland" - what on earth do you mean ?
                  Perhaps he has a bone to pick with JP forum member landing-gear.

                  I am led to understand that the International Association of Machinists, the labor union that represents Boeing's factory workers, will be holding a rally in support of the 767 tanker bid. Why didn't they think of that before?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    If he has a bone to pick, he knows where i am...JP Photos
                    Personally i prefer a T-Bone..and Chips...

                    Back on topic....i assume the 330 tanker will utilise the forward landing gear blister in order to level the aircraft on the deck?
                    Has the engine supplier been nominated?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by JordanD
                      This is really off topic here, and I'm not going to comment on your opinions, but could you please please please use capitalization, punctuation, and spell out your words correctly? This is not a text message. Your profile says you're nearly 18 so there's no reason to type like that anymore..
                      As if what a "nearly-18-year-old" thinks about this is of any importance.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Harlequin67
                        There appears to me to be only one party to blame for Boeing not winning the contract, and that is Boeing.
                        I don't think Boeing can be "blamed" for not winning the contract. It was obvious from the start they would only win if it was considered buying "Made in the USA" was more important than the quality of the product. If the decision was to be made primarily on the grounds of product quality they were never going to have a snowflakes chance in hell.

                        Originally posted by Harlequin67
                        I believe that Boeing may have been hamstrung by the 767 being a smaller airframe, and the 777 being too large. The A330 may have sat very happily between the two Boeing products.
                        Exactly. Not only is the 767 smaller, it cannot match the A330 in other critical performance measures - which is why orders for the Commercial version have all but stopped. Boeing were simply caught at the wrong time in the cycle for this order. Maybe 15 or 20 years from now the 787 will be the right product at the right time for a large military order.

                        Originally posted by Harlequin67
                        I think Boeing are also guilty of complacency. They may have thought that this type of contract could never be given to Airbus. I would refer them to the Marine 1 replacement program being won by the EH101. I think this sends a clear signal to American companies, Lockheed, Boeing, etc, that they need to provide equipment at a cost that has the same ability as European goods.
                        You can't design a new plane in every class every 5 years. There are times that your competitor is going to have a more modern product. Regardless of whether they were complacent or not they didn't have a product that could compete with the A330. And there was nothing they could do about it - except hope nationalistic sentiment would get them over the line.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Does anyone know if the new tanker will have bail-out provisions?

                          The bail-out hatch in the KC-135 is right behind the pilot seat.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            is that the bailout hatch or an entrance into the plane? The 135 Wing I live near uses that to enter the aircraft.



                            unless that door comes off, you'll have a hard time opening it while flying to bail!

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by tsv
                              I don't think Boeing can be "blamed" for not winning the contract. It was obvious from the start they would only win if it was considered buying "Made in the USA" was more important than the quality of the product. If the decision was to be made primarily on the grounds of product quality they were never going to have a snowflakes chance in hell.
                              That's a very sweeping statement. To which quality metric are you referring? Please provide source. Thanks in advance.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Verbal
                                That's a very sweeping statement. To which quality metric are you referring? Please provide source. Thanks in advance.
                                You mean quality matrix?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X