Sign the petition to redo the $40 Billion contract given to AirBus at Sen. Patty Murray site - Link

[1776Forever]

On Friday, February 29, Senator Murray stood with the men and women of Boeing in Everett as the Air Force announced that it would be outsourcing a $40 billion contract to build aerial refueling tankers to the European company Airbus. Boeing workers were shocked, angry, and wanted answers – and so does Senator Murray.

Sign the petition to redo the contract at U.S. Senator Patty Murray site - Link

http://murray.senate.gov/tankers/index.cfm

.........

Let's stand up for our tax payer money staying in the U.S. and not only for the money and jobs but the security issues as well!

:applause:

[godai]

1. Not clear to me that Boeing deserved the contract. It went to Northorp Grumman and EADS

"News 5 has learned the Air Force selected Northorp Grumman and EADS to build its new fleet of Air Refuelers. They beat out Boeing, who supplied the military with its current tanker, the KC-135. Friday's news comes as a great win to Mobile. It means 15-hundred new high-tech jobs and a 600 million dollar facility to Brookley Field. State and Local leaders have worked for three years to be competitive in this 40 billion dollar contract against industry favorite Boeing. The decision was anticipated all week.
On Thursday, Reuters released a story claiming that the Air Force changed some of its criteria in the contest a few weeks ago. That change led to a lower score for the Northrop team. Neither side would comment on the change in criteria.

Boeing was originally supposed to assemble the tankers. In 2001, Boeing was chosen to lease tankers to the Air Force. Congress canceled that deal after discovering that the company and the Air Force worked together to jack up the prices. The deal sent two Boeing executives to prison."

http://www.wkrg.com/news/article/mobile_wins_tanker_contract/10912/

[1776Forever]

3. Here is an article that helps to clairy the current situation.......

US fury grows over EADS deal

By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington, Sylvia Pfeifer in,London and Hal Weitzman in Chicago

Published: March 6 2008 02:00 | Last updated: March 6 2008 02:00

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d118fe84-eb1e-11dc-a5f4-0000779fd2ac.html

At a Congressional hearing on the decision, John Murtha, the powerful Democratic chairman of the appropriations defence committee, said Congress could block the purchase of the 179 tankers if the air force's explanation for its decision was unsatisfactory.

"The political implications are important," said Mr Murtha. "All this committee has to do is stop the money and this programme is not going forward.''

The air force decision stunned analysts, who expected Boeing, which has supplied the US military with refuelling tankers for five decades, to win the competition. The deal could ultimately be worth more than $100bn as the air force replaces its entire tanker fleet of about 600 aircraft.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, the two Democratic White House contenders, have criticised the deal along with Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic speaker, and Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic majority leader. John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee who led the Congressional investigation into the original Boeing deal, said he hoped the air force had conducted a fair competition.

In announcing the decision last week, senior air force officials said EADS and Northrop had offered a better aircraft capable of carrying more fuel, more cargo and more passengers.

However, Jim Albaugh, chief executive of Boeing's integrated defence systems unit, yesterday suggested Boeing had been misled by the air force, adding that the company could have offered a larger aircraft, the 777, had it understood that was an important concern.

Mr Albaugh said there was a "disconnect" between the comments by General Arthur Lichte, head of US Air Mobility Command, and the way Boeing read the brief sent out by the air force. "The was never about the biggest airplane, who could haul the most cargo . . . the most gas," said Mr Albaugh.

[KeepItReal]

2. Boeing snatched defeat from the jaws of victory on this one

They rigged and wrecked the original acquisition process (remember that?), then lose the new contest to a newer, more modern plane design by Airbus/Northrop.

"In December 2003, the Pentagon announced the project was to be frozen while an investigation of allegations of corruption by one if its former procurement staffers, Darleen Druyun (who had moved to Boeing in January) was begun. Druyun pleaded guilty and was sentenced to nine months in jail for "negotiating a job with Boeing at the same time she was involved in contracts with the company". Additional fallout included the resignation of Boeing CEO Philip M. Condit and the termination of CFO Michael M. Sears."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC-767


"The decision also seals the fate for Boeing's 767 production line. The far newer A330 design continues to outpace the 767 in commercial orders. Boeing has about four years of work left for its Everett, Wash., production line without more orders. The company was looking to the U.S. Air Force to be the only and final 767 customer in the coming years."

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/EADS02298.xml