Boeing to get another shot at $35B Air Force tanker contract

If we have to dool out that kind of money, I hope it aids our American workers. Sure hope every I is dotted every T crossed, no mistakes this time. Lets get it right! for goodness sakes, no wonder our country is sliding off its perch! No cost over-runs, please!

We need to pick the better product bottom line. Our Forces deserve the best. Sadly the military has an unoffical saying "Remember your rifle was made by the lowest bidder".

HOWEVER I Think 100% Of our military equipment should be domestic, we should be getting NOTHING from china, Japan, Europe, not a thing. Should a war break out we cant afford to have 80% Of our smartbomb parts come china

How does the Chicago Tribune not get the name of the company right? It's not Northrop, it's Northrop Grumman. Duh.

So that means the Charles De Gaulle saw service in the Afghan mission from early 2002 until late 2007. Thanks!

I'll say once again ... I favored the Boeing proposal because if they were working off the same spec, Boeing would have presented a 777-based solution instead of a 767-based one. But I have not illusions of Boeing being a "one stop shop" as Dave in Oregon claims, not after seeing the Dreamlifter in Nagoya, Japan which is a modified 747 to ship the wings for the 787.

Ahhhh, we'll just keep flying the KC-135, it hasn't let us down yet.

This contract should go to an American company. Period.

John wrote:

We need to pick the better product bottom line. Our Forces deserve the best. Sadly the military has an unoffical saying "Remember your rifle was made by the lowest bidder".

LOL! You reminded me of the opening remarks made by a speaker in a hotel ballroom: "Thank you for inviting me here tonight. And for those of you seated beneath the chandeliers, remember that they were installed several years ago by the lowest bidder." I have to agree with some of the previous comments, that something was screwy with either the specifications or the judging when the two contenders submitted such different-sized airplanes.

Too bad, Northrup has a lot more Chicago based employees than Boeing. They are a US based company with only an investment from Airbus.

BlagoFundRaiser wrote:

So can we expect a fair fight this time? Probably not.
Meanwhile the Russians get richer with oil and the Chinese buy our currency and the Arabs buy our markets.
Soon with all this infighting we won't have money to buy gas to put in the tankers. At least we still have American Idol and Paris Hilton.

The US *NEEDS* Paris Hilton. That is fact.

Sharon wrote:

Boeing is a spoilt little baby who didn't get its way just this one time so it turned to the other parent.
This is wrong on so many levels, it's hard to know where to start.

such profound logic! I hope you aren't old enough to vote.
I guess you'd like sending $35 billion tax dollars to France? The contract was not awarded to "Northrop Grumman", it was awarded to Airbus who was subcontracting some of it to NG.

Hate to see US Air Force planes being refueled by European tankers.

Wrong handle, 'reality'. In this universe, Northrop Grumman leads a consortium and EADS is a subcontractor. Boeing has as much 'foreign' content but none are as big as EADS to look like an equal partner.

Edward wrote:

I guess cheaters do prosper.

Yes, the French have done VERY well as a whole.

Of course you were aware that the governments of France, Germany, Spain and England underwrite Airbus to the tune of billions of euros a year.

And here is a golden opportunity for the US government to do the same!