Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Mar 1, 2019 1:54:32 GMT 1
Oh my. Some things Boeing has still not learnt to avoid from the past 787 mistakes... |
|
|
|
Post by kevin5345179 on Mar 1, 2019 19:32:44 GMT 1
now USAF won't take anymore planes  |
|
|
|
Post by fanairbus on Mar 2, 2019 9:24:58 GMT 1
Here we go again - the preponderance of profit vs safety and decisions taken for political reasons rather based on technological assessment. Remember the space shuttle launch after freezing conditions? Other countries need to beware. The UK has IMO already accepted too many US business traits with disproportionate rewards to those driving businesses versus their staff but in the end the money bean counters always seem to win out - until they are or their relatives are on a plane that comes down.
On a happier tone, could this still give Airbus' A330 tanker some hope in the US? - maybe the US accepting a type mix? If both can refuel all USAF planes then theoretically that it is possible and is no more than commercial fleet mixes of Boeing and Airbus, which seem to work. Oh but my musings have ignored politics...silly me.
|
|
|
|
Post by marlibu on Mar 3, 2019 2:46:18 GMT 1
This saga is truly depressing. The tax payers if the US deserve a lot better. From both parties involved here. Really awful
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Mar 3, 2019 11:59:36 GMT 1
The tax payers in the US deserve a lot better. Actually, this is a fixed price contract, so that extra costs are borne by Boeing. The USAF, however, is getting its birds later than planned, but can inflict hefty penalties on Boeing. |
|
|
|
Post by marlibu on Mar 3, 2019 14:55:00 GMT 1
Thanks for that clarification. much appreciated.
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Mar 3, 2019 15:48:59 GMT 1
Still, does not preclude USAF from having seconds thoughts about awarding contracts to Boeing for their poor execution. USAF would have been better off taking their chances with Airbus instead.
|
|
mtrunz
delivered!
Digital Aviation/Meteo Analyst
Posts: 1,956 
|
Post by mtrunz on Mar 3, 2019 16:19:22 GMT 1
As much as we wish Airbus to get to the contract, it's not going to happen. Unless.... it will be built in the U.S.
*cough* Mobile, Alabama *cough*
But even many years back when Airbus technically did get a contract and then the U.S. reversed their decision, didn't Airbus wanted to built them in Mobile anyways? I just don't see it happening. I feel like they have more lobbying power than Airbus does in the U.S.
But who knows, right?
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Mar 3, 2019 16:40:27 GMT 1
I should have clarified by saying future contracts. As far as the current tanker programme goes, that ship has sailed.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Mar 4, 2019 10:02:16 GMT 1
I should have clarified by saying future contracts. As far as the current tanker programme goes, that ship has sailed. Even with a FAL in Mobile, I don't see Airbus getting a military contract over a US entranched competitor any time soon. |
|
