I had a hunch the group was carrying on like a teenager on the eve of prom night--resorting to the playing-hard-to-get pout. I was right. Airbus/EADS, but this time without Northrop Grumman--has changed its tactics and has decided that screaming out its availability is the correct path to get invited to the ball.
Boeing was the other bidder on the KC-X.
EADS is asking the Pentagon for a 90-day extension so it can prepare a new offer.
The first proposal didn't match the Air Force's needs. Let's revisit what Dan Spencer wrote in the Examiner:
Northrop was planning to offer an Airbus plane that was simply too big and ill equipped for what the Air Force needs. Northrop's French partner actually began a campaign to criticize the U.S. Military for those specs -- something reminiscent (and not in a good way) of the long history of French criticism of U.S. defense policies.But amidst the cries of unfairness from EADS, comes news that World Trade Organization is telling the European Union that it needs to end its illegal subsidies to Airbus planes.
That led Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) to comment, "We finally have a concrete ruling to justify what we have been saying for years." In other words, the EU and EADS wasn't playing fair.
The Boeing KC-X bid, according to a study obtained by Marathon Pundit, would lead to the 62,000 to 70,000 new American jobs--ten times more than the Airbus/EADS/Northrop Grumman proposal. And remember, this time around Northrop Grumman isn't a partner in the bid. Which means a win for EADS would very likely mean even fewer jobs created here.
Related post:
Hot air from France on Air Force tanker deal
Technorati tags:
military 
business 
Boeing 
airbus 
politique 
northrop grumman 
air force 
aviation 
jobs 
republican 
Kansas 
Wichita 
todd tiahrt
No comments:
Post a Comment