Let The Howling Begin
Actually, the howling has already started. The decision by the US Air Force to award a new aerial refueling tanker contract to a Northrup-Grumman/EADS consortium instead of to Boeing is actually uniting lawmakers from both parties. There is bipartisan outrage at the decision.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Air Force decision awarding a $35 billion aircraft contract to a team including the European parent of Airbus landed like a bomb in Congress on Friday, drawing howls of protest from lawmakers aligned with the loser, America's Boeing Co.
The Congressional delegation from the Seattle area said they were "outraged." Kansas Republican Rep. Todd Tiahrt vowed to seek a review of the decision "at the highest levels of the Pentagon and Congress" in hopes of reversing it.
Boeing has big facilities in both Seattle and Wichita, which stood to gain from the long-term project to build up to 179 aerial refueling tankers. Although Boeing was favored to win the contract, the Air Force awarded it to a partnership between Northrop Grumman and Europe's EADS.
Conventional wisdom was running so strongly against Northrop-EADS in some corners of Capitol Hill that Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's office issued a statement late on Friday declaring Boeing the winner. It was swiftly retracted.
Lawmakers from Alabama, where Northrop and EADS plan to do some tanker work, were effusive in praising the Air Force.
Lawmakers are demanding investigations, reviews and just about everything else under the sun over this. It would seem to be a case of being caught in their own rhetoric, however. This one will be interesting to watch.
By GM Cassel AMH1(AW) USN RET, Saturday, 1 March , 2008 @ 9:01 am
I am against it not just for the fact the bulk of the airplane will come from overseas but due to the fact that airbuses are piles of junk. The manufacturing process does not use clad aluminum. Cladding is vital in corrosion control. Maintenance cost will jump before the planes are really getting a significant number of cycles and hours on them.
Just so you know, I don’t get on any Airbus commercial aircraft because of this very reason. To me, the Airbus product is unsafe.
By old_dawg, Saturday, 1 March , 2008 @ 11:15 am
The outside-the beltway wisdom was that there wasn’t much chance that Boeing would get the contract in this round, given the egregious nature of the scandal over the first contract award. What Boeing and the Air Force are hoping is that Congress will force the Air Force to "re-evaluate" the award and give it to them.
By Sam, Saturday, 1 March , 2008 @ 8:06 pm
I thought they were planning on building these planes at a newly constructed factory in Alabama? Any one know how much of the parts and materials would be imported versus domestically sourced? I’m curious because I don’t know much about the tanker contract.
By kidrob, Sunday, 2 March , 2008 @ 7:48 am
congress has been busy with more pressing issues. did roger clemens take steroids? lets get to the bottom of this
By Crazy Politico, Sunday, 2 March , 2008 @ 8:20 am
The Air Force was in a "no win" situation on this one. If they gave it to Boeing because of more "domestically sourced" parts they’d be questioned on the previous contract, and the fact that Boeing’s entry has less range, capacity, and configurations than the Northrop-EADS plane. Now that Nortrop wins they get questions about foreign supplied parts. It sucks to be the ball in a game of political football, but that’s the position the Air Force is in.