Boeing Wins Tanker Contract - Pensacola Fishing Forum

Go Back   Pensacola Fishing Forum > General Discussion > Off Topic

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-24-2011, 06:16 PM   #1
Senior Member
Sailfish
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,704
Default Boeing Wins Tanker Contract

That sucks for Mobile and the Gulf Coast in general!

What do ya'll think about it? Does this means EADS will protest like Boeing did the first time and delay it even further?

Last edited by Rammer Jammer; 02-24-2011 at 06:19 PM.
Rammer Jammer is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 

Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-24-2011, 06:21 PM   #2
Senior Member
Sailfish
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,402
Default

They'll drag it out for a few more years.
__________________
http://gotdirtycarpettile.impress.ly/

Accutech Carpet And Tile Cleaning

850-529-1335
kelly1 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 06:25 PM   #3
Senior Member
Grouper
 
Big B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 955
Default

I was hoping for a raise out of the deal
Where I work EADS would be looking for people to build and my work would have been perfect for them to pull people from , which would force my company to pay more. OH Well that sucks
Big B is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 06:33 PM   #4
Neptune calls me "Daddy"
Grand Slam
 
jim t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,032
Default

EADS is supposed to start building a civilian cargo version in Mobile anyway. I hope that remains true.

Jim
jim t is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 06:53 PM   #5
Senior Member
Trigger
 
Doomsday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Crestview, Fl
Posts: 363
Default

Gentlemen,

I'm not trying to start an argument, but I personally believe this is good news. It is my opinion that defense contracts should go to American companies using American technology. I realize this is not the best short term effect locally, but in my opinion it serves the national interest to use American companies for important weapon systems (I know the tanker does not blow stuff up, but it is considered to be a major weapon system purchase). In my opinion, when we don't produce our own weapons of war and maintain the ability to produce them right here we have big problems. Superpowers should not have to buy their weapons from abroad. Just my .02 worth.
Doomsday is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 07:37 PM   #6
Neptune calls me "Daddy"
Grand Slam
 
jim t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomsday View Post
Gentlemen,

I'm not trying to start an argument, but I personally believe this is good news. It is my opinion that defense contracts should go to American companies using American technology. I realize this is not the best short term effect locally, but in my opinion it serves the national interest to use American companies for important weapon systems (I know the tanker does not blow stuff up, but it is considered to be a major weapon system purchase). In my opinion, when we don't produce our own weapons of war and maintain the ability to produce them right here we have big problems. Superpowers should not have to buy their weapons from abroad. Just my .02 worth.
That's a widely held and worthy point.

Two problems:

Politically our allies can wonder how strong the alliance is if we refuse to buy their weapons systems

Without the EADS bid it'd be a single source bid and Boeing could basically name it's price. (Lockheed doesn't make big jets and never considered a bid for this, the largest Pentagon contract ever).

BOTH are proven reliable airframes. EADS is further ahead technology wise with the A-330, Boeing had actually planned to retire 767 program after current orders were filled. So it'll be a bit trickier for them to modernize it.

Jim

Last edited by jim t; 02-24-2011 at 07:40 PM.
jim t is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 08:16 PM   #7
Senior Member
Grouper
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Daphne, Al
Posts: 1,107
Default

I don't think that Eads will protest. They won it the first go round and it was taken from them and now they lost it the second round. I feel that the powers in charge of the process wanted boeing to win it. Both make fine aircraft. I just hope boeing gets held to its contract because from what I have heard about them they miss many delivery deadlines.
dsar592 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 08:41 PM   #8
Senior Member
Grouper
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 786
Default

Jim T, you know lots more about aircraft than I do, but it seems to me that the airforce is replacing an airplane based on 1950s technology with one having about the same capabiliites but employing 1970s technology. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to, since (it is said) the current tanker won't be obsolete for another 30 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC-135

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_767

Joraca
Joraca is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 09:02 PM   #9
Neptune calls me "Daddy"
Grand Slam
 
jim t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,032
Default

Jo,

A 50 year old aircraft design is not nearly as reliable as a 30 year old aircraft design. But a 10 year old aircraft is MUCH more reliable.

Doesn't seem to matter that it's a newer 50 year old design model, it still breaks down more often.

Newer design models just work better. (once you work out the bugs).

Newer technology can be engineered into older aircraft, but it doesn't make that old airplane a new model. There are still issues with older models that persist till that model is retired.

Ask fishinfool,... after he blames the pilots, , he'll tell you the C -model C-130's are just an old design and they break more than a J-model C-130, but not necessarily because it's just older.

Jim
jim t is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-24-2011, 09:09 PM   #10
Neptune calls me "Daddy"
Grand Slam
 
jim t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,032
Default

As a parallel, a 63 Corvette broke a lot more often even brand new, than a 2011 Corvette does today.

Even if you change to a newer motor, the rest is still 60's technology.

Newer technology almost always leads to better reliability.

Same for computers, washing machines (though there is ALWAYS anecdotal evidence that shows your grandma's washing machine has lasted 50 years)

Jim
jim t is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Pensacola Fishing Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
How Did You Find Us?
Tell us how you heard about Pensacola Fishing Forum.

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.