previous post next post  

Heh...

 This was not unexpected.

A political football for years, this struggle has left a string of bodies in its wake, not the least of which was one of the finest 4-stars (scroll down to Para 5) I ever had the distinct pleasure to work with. Alas, he got caught in the kill sack between the Pentagon, Air Force and the *cough* Congress.

Both sides have legit issues and the whole thing was a chocolate mess from the start--and trust me, I'm no friend of Boeing--but the Airbus, in my humble opinion, couldn't do all the things it should have been able to do.

Finally, and I'll do a little more digging to back this up, but I wouldn't trust a French company any farther than I could throw their headquarters building when it comes to maintaining any semblance of security on the KC-30s vulnerabilities. That little list would be emailed to Moscow, Beijing and Teheran before the first jet was on the ramp.


6 Comments

There is a silver lining to the Airbus bid, should that team win the recompete.

Then at least, Euro-taxpayers will be subsidizing *our* defense expenditures...
 
 Well, Mikoyan and Sukhoi are also nationally subsidized and make big airplanes too so, by that logic, why not go with them? They would probably be cheaper and willing to build something that we can use, who Northrop can partner with and, like the 'Bus do most of what the proposal calls for. Besides, their strategic goals are fairly similar to the French, no?
 
At the risk of sounding stupid, why not go with (say) an existing Boeing design? They need a cargo carrier/tanker, yes? Surely the company has a wide variety available.

   

Geez, Dusty - I'm just looking for the silver lining, not making recommendations!

Snerk!

 
No "fire support blogs"?

Damn, dipped out again.