I think all of you are talking about the A380, not the A300 which was the first design by Airbus. Second, the company is not getting its ass kicked over it, actually the books are filled with contracts, but because of the current bickering between Germany and France on who gets to produce which part of the plane the costs of making the plane do not leave a large enough margin - thus the whole company is needs to lay off jobs to get more efficient which is in turn hindered by politicians on both sides of the Rhine to avoid losing jobs in their country.
Wow, Germany and France arguing. Who would have thought? Maybe they should make one big plant in Alsace-Lorraine and then they can share custody every 50-75 years.
Why the hell do people still dislike the French? I thought that bullshit was over a while ago.
It's one of the longest running jokes in history... at least since the Carolingians. There are superiority complexes, assumptions of cultural protectionism, and all sorts of other stuff going on since Rome fell and the Franks took over.
There's also the rampant antisemitism, to the point that if you are Jewish and refuse something, the Frenchman will say "Jew."
I suppose whether this is sensible or not depends on whether or not this contract was supposed to be an incentive package for US industry and a way or targetting financial aid to a certain place, or a way to get the air force these tankers that they needed. Clearly either way the air force get some tankers, but if the reason they were getting tankers now is because the US government thought Cleveland needed some new investment and then you ship the contract overseas then thats pretty silly.
Although, it looks like the planes are being made in the UK, which is nice and I suppose generating some US funded jobs overseas will be good for the US' public image in Europe. Which can't hurt.
There's been a trend recently for the US armed services to go for foreign product for second line aircraft. The VH-72, Kestrel (Marine One), C-27J are all examples of this.
Now, it can be argued that the government should buy domestic equipment that the country needs to retain a competency in (Fighter aircraft and guided weapons for example) and that is the case for most of the major aerospace country (France, Russia, USA and, sadly decreasingly, the UK).
But what is gained by buying a domestic tanker? At the end of the day its just a converted freight plane! Come thirty years time, Boeing will still be able to make a tanker.
We do more than make sure it's operational; we customize it, and give it crew perks. We can put in new seats, as opposed to old ones that are falling part, or we can add a new plotter's table, because the old one is missing hardware.
Cal up MTV and try to sell them Pimp My 'Plane!
I want to see a C130 with spinners on the landing gear and a 5k sound rig in the hold.
On NPR this morning I was listening to some Congressmen bloviating about the terrible injustice inherent in the Air Force’s decision to give a contract to build re-fueling tankers to EADS, a French company the Air Force says promises the most high-quality aircraft. The level of caterwauling over the Air Force not abusing the contracting system and choosing what it judges to be the best use of its massive allotment of taxpayer money nakedly reveals the normal corruption of the system. The Congressmen barely bothered to dredge up some quasi-patriotic America-first tropes to conceal their plain assumption that the function of military spending is to redistribute taxpayer money to their districts. The idea that the Air Force would want the best planes with which to serve the military functions of the Air Force: outrageous! Because transfers of tax money to politically-connected arms manufacturers and their highly-compensated employees is what wars are for. Obviously. Get with the program, Air Force.
On NPR this morning I was listening to some Congressmen bloviating about the terrible injustice inherent in the Air Force’s decision to give a contract to build re-fueling tankers to EADS, a French company the Air Force says promises the most high-quality aircraft. The level of caterwauling over the Air Force not abusing the contracting system and choosing what it judges to be the best use of its massive allotment of taxpayer money nakedly reveals the normal corruption of the system. The Congressmen barely bothered to dredge up some quasi-patriotic America-first tropes to conceal their plain assumption that the function of military spending is to redistribute taxpayer money to their districts. The idea that the Air Force would want the best planes with which to serve the military functions of the Air Force: outrageous! Because transfers of tax money to politically-connected arms manufacturers and their highly-compensated employees is what wars are for. Obviously. Get with the program, Air Force.
Coming from the flightline side of the USAF, and working on these planes, I can tell you one thing: I don't pride myself on where these planes come from. In fact, a lot of the planes I operate fail, miserably, constantly, and I wouldn't mind seeing some of them literally go to the bone yard (it's a mile away from our squadron). The sad thing is that some of the planes I work on might, at some point, have been used in Vietnam, so these things are very, very enriched with American history.
However, they do not suite our current mission, and up until recently, have hindered our ability to perform. Nothing, and I mean nothing pisses me off more about the AF than throwing needless pride into the mix when you can get a job done efficient and quick, because that one second you procrastinate maybe that one second you fail to save a life.
To that, I'm a little offset that the French will be building for us. I can tell you right now, I have no love for them, at all, but if they make a good product, and one that serves us well for years, I have no problem with that.
Unfortunately, it wouldn't be the first time I've seen half-assed ideas like this go astray in the AF.
Little late to the thread here, but do you work out of Davis-Montham?
Posts
There's also the rampant antisemitism, to the point that if you are Jewish and refuse something, the Frenchman will say "Jew."
Although, it looks like the planes are being made in the UK, which is nice and I suppose generating some US funded jobs overseas will be good for the US' public image in Europe. Which can't hurt.
Now, it can be argued that the government should buy domestic equipment that the country needs to retain a competency in (Fighter aircraft and guided weapons for example) and that is the case for most of the major aerospace country (France, Russia, USA and, sadly decreasingly, the UK).
But what is gained by buying a domestic tanker? At the end of the day its just a converted freight plane! Come thirty years time, Boeing will still be able to make a tanker.
My other sig sucks as well...
Cal up MTV and try to sell them Pimp My 'Plane!
I want to see a C130 with spinners on the landing gear and a 5k sound rig in the hold.
http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/03/06/your-democracy-in-action/
That's what it's all about.
Little late to the thread here, but do you work out of Davis-Montham?