[ARCHIVED THREAD] - EADS (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 2/29/2008 12:58:57 PM EDT
| Got the contract, I am so PISSED at the .gov right now. |
You probably like NAFTA too, huh? |
|
Not saying I like the decision, but a free market is a free market and capitalism is what our country is founded on. If some other countrys aircraft manufacturer beat one of ours at our own game, thems the breaks. I don't like having our mil aircraft subject to the supply lines of a forign country at all, but this is what happens when you open the bidding process to all commers. Complain about how the bidding process is done, not the final decision. |
Not EXACTLY. While a LOT of it will be done in Europe, Northrop Grumman and EADS are putting a new facility in Mobile, AL. That will open a lot of jobs there. Probably not as much as Boeing would have added in Everett, but it's not ALL going overseas. While I'm not happy about the decision either (more money and jobs in Everett helps my house go up in value), 2WP is right. Love it or Hate it, it's a free market. |
1500 EADS jobs, 8000 if Boeing had gotten it. You can bet the avonics that goes into it is going to go into the EADS commercial just two years later. .GOV just gave another few secrets away. ALL THE PROFITS WILL GO TO EUROPE. You tax money at work. |
I wonder how you would feel if .gov shipped all the ship repairs to Taiwan? They could do it cheaper over there. Good idea, I think I will write congress about doing just that. |
And if Boeing had the contract a lot of the engineering would have been done by the Canadian company that bought Boeing Wichita. |
+1 As somebody who has worked in the Aerospace Business for 28 years this is TRULY the biggest stab in the back to US Taxpayers and the American Aerospace Business. You want proof of "outsourcing"? We have the Chinese make all our goods, now I guess we have taken the first step in having FOREIGN COUNTRIES make our weapons. The Northrop-Grumman portion of this is nothing but bullshit window dressing. 
|
I agree with the sentiment but if the people have the WalMart mentality how can they expect the government not to? |
True. There lays the problem. "Made in America" means nothing anymore. Aerospace (especially defense products) is still the one area we dominate and lead the world in R&D and production/sophistication. Our R&D budgets dwarf European countries, but now under the PHONY SCAM of Northrop-Grumman we have been duped into having our mission critical long reach fighter and bomber refueling at the mercy of Europe. If anyone really believes A330 aircraft other than final assembly will be built in America has been smoking too much hash. The US Taxpayer just picked up the tab for the "Frogs" to peddle their wares in America. |
|
Umm, didn't Boeing have the contract? And didn't they lose it because of some shenanigans? linky to the SEATTLE Times Story |
Dino, ya know I love ya, but I can't help but chuckle. The govt. already tried this with Mexico and the Phillipines. After discovering just how "quality" the work was after having steam pipes blow and boil a few people, the govt. learned its lesson aobut outsourcing ship repairs. As it were, there are so many technical processes that the govt. requires in the workmanship that there is no way that this work can be outsourced. No other country on the planet with the exception of England (costs too high), Germany perhaps (still not cost effective, france(back to cost again) or maybe a few select others who could pull it off, and even then it would be with MASSIVE oversight to the point that there would almost be a one to one oversite to worker ratio. Lets not forget the security aspect, NOFORN, classified material, etc, and the trump card, Nuc work. Face it, the American Naval shipyard system isn't going anywhere and your comparison dosn't hold water. I understand that you're trying to get me as pissed off as you so I'll see your point of view, but it won't happen. I don't let my emotions make my decisions for me. Once again, the fact is that we have a free market economy. To close it down for one thing opens the possibility of closing it down for all things, and next thing you know, our military is driving a bunch of Pinto's because all the contracts are forced closed and companies start making shitty stuff because they know they have no competition. I also learned that Boeing brought this on themselves. This contract was originally being considered a few years ago, and the Air Force lady who was working the bidding process with Boeing was caught working an employment deal with them at the SAME TIME for when she retired. She did jail time over it and the CFO of Boeing resigned over this. BECAUSE OF THIS, the bidding was opened up to all commers. Place the blame where it belongs instead of reacting with your emotions. Yes, it sucks that jobs here are lost, yes it sucks that our mil supply line just got longer and easier to break, but thems the breaks when people fuck up. There were only two viable platforms for the project, these guys had one and Boeing had one. And Boeing got beat at their own game because of their stupidity. Now if the frenchies prove as bad at plane building as the mexicans or phillipinos did at ship repair, then we will see the contract return to the US and it will be chalked up to lessons learned. If not, that's what we get for allowing corruption in the bidding process. As I said, place the blame where it really belongs. edited to add: See the linked story in the post above. It explains it better then I can. |
A couple of my friends had about a year in on this project (one just under, one just over). They were working for a French company at Boeing Wichita. |
Bullshit, I was pointing out it CAN happen to you. When it does I want to see any crying from your end. (but you would anyway) My major bitch (the same I have for people that own cars from out of country) is the profit from this deal is going to fucking Europe. There will be major profit in it as well. Wait till the cost over runs come to pass, and they will. If you think you are in a vocation that can't be outsourced you are only fooling yourself. |
I wouldn't be surprised if just that happened......another option is an additional contract that ends up fielding both designs because the 767 version can be delivered sooner and these KC-135's are really old. |
|
I'm with Dino on this to the fucking grave. So Boeing fucked up, that does not mean they should just outsource it to another country. At least put a stipulation in the biding that it has to be built in the USA. Pisses me off that they are sending the jobs over seas. What are we going to do when there are no jobs in the U.S.? Go work in Mexico.... |
|
I agree, it should have gone to a US company. But which one? They're all gone. |
|
Thread is full of fail; National socialists calling monopoly a free market.  If the D.O.D paid it's own way it would be free market but when Americans are taxed and the money is spent on defense that does not secure raw material import and value added export the Americans get double raped. D.O.D does not add value to the economy, it only takes, but spending the tax money on foreign manufacturers is absolute suicide for the American economy. The one small advantage America still has is it's agriculture but gov Gargoyle and the other dipshits are doing their best to destroy that as well.
|
|
|
If the US companies hadn't gotten so cocky, and just plain stupid, then this might not be happening. Why buy a shitty, or overpriced product when a better alternative exists? Do you want an actual free market with real competition and quality goods, or do you want us to take a further leap into Socialism and extreme corporate welfare? |
Sorry, but some jobs simply can not EVER be outsourced. Some jobs HAVE to be done by people that are here. Unfortunately, most of those are low paying service industry jobs (grocery clerks, hotel maids, etc.)  Our nuclear security is one. Sure, we let Puerto Ricans have the clearance to turn wrenches on warheads, but it's on our own land, under supervision. We will always do our own maintenance on anything nuclear until we're just a state under a bigger organization, like the UN (or NATO, NAFTA, etc.). Frankly, I never wanted to go TDY oversees, so I picked a job that is done stateside, knowing that I'd never deploy. Of course, it also meant I didn't get any of the cool bases, or have any skills in demand when I got out, but it was the choice I made.
Bingo. We have a bunch of people thinking that they shouldn't have to be competitive at their jobs. That's the real issue no matter how much rhetoric is being used about how dependant we are on others, or how much less income there will be locally (which, BTW, directly affects the free beer distributed in my neighborhood ), or whatever other excuses.It's simple capitalism. As a taxpayer, AND as a beneficiary of the "services provided by the DoD", I want the best product for the cheaper price. I havn't heard a single person (including the Boeing employees I've talked to) say that we were producing a better product. Only that it was inhererantly better because it was made in the US. And of course, everyone knows that we have magic dirt over here; everything that touches it is automatically just better than stuff from the other countrries.
Unfortunately the only answer is "when we are all equal." Take that for whichever option you choose. |
Lets not forget that for every one job at Boeing there are about (not sure exactly) like four or five contractor jobs all over the US. So if you say we loose about 8000 at Boeing multiply that by.... well you do the math. That is a heck of alot of people loosing there jobs . Lets not forget national security, the Frogs have thrown us under the bus numerous times. We don't need to have a diplomatic spat and they hold the deliveries hostage. The bottom line for me is national security and our tax dollars helping Europes economy when ours is in the toilet. If the issue was that we offered a smaller aircraft in the 767. I had heard that we had given them a verbal that if they wanted a larger aircraft we could offer the 777.(Don't know how true will have to check this out) Free market or not our tax dollars should not go over sea's. They want to play in our ball park let them build that factory in the south. Establish themselves for ten years before they can bid on contracts, maybe then they can call themselves an American company till then .%&*K OFF! I proudly wore the Air Force Blue from 1981-1987 I was a Crew Chief on F-15's & a Pneudraulics Systems Specialist on AC130H Gunships both American Made Aircraft ! I can honestly say I am ashamed and disappointed in the USAF,DOD, Gov .............My rant is over
|
the buck dose not end there!!! It then goes onto may others businesses that support the local communities and even more jobs. If people don't have money to spend, business's like mine and others will belly up. Bottom line is it hurts everyone except the frogs. Just because they can do it cheaper does not mean it will be cheaper in the end, if we the people don't have jobs and able to pay for all the pork the Gov wants. The Gov will just raise more taxes so they can have what they want regardless. As I see it this is a deadly cycle for every one including the Gov. I think even if it costs more to build military supplies, it should be the american people that should be doing the building. That's money going right back into our economy the the american people will be spending, and employing even more americans right on down the food chain. I don't see how we can benefit giving that money to other countries. OH I almost forgot we need to take care of everyone else's problems before out own.
|
| So heres a wake up call to EVERYONE of us not just us Boeing Employees. We NEED TO MAKE ALOT OF NOISE IE internet chats. Go to media sites regarding this issue. Make your voices be heard. Call, write, e-mail our elected officials tell them what we think this means to you us and where we want our tax dollars spent. Do it in an manner that the receiving party can't use it as an excuse to round file it because we sound like raving lunatics. |
But M9s, M240s and 249s, M16s are all made here. Only 58% of the KC45 will be made in Alabama, including final assembly, propulsion, and "militarization". 42% will be made in Europe. That was in a side bar on the front page of yesterday's PI, but I can't find it today on the web site. |
|
Boeing is already building a 767 tanker for several foriegn customers (Google: Boeing GTTA). I believe several aspects of the program leave a lot to be desired. I'm sure DOD was/is aware of the issues and so was/is McCain....you do the math! In the end, I suspect Boeing lost the contract to the USAF all on its own. 
|
|
I had no idea how much was "out sourced" for the military... This should be a crime! BAE Systems plc A company registered in England and Wales PSG Helmets and more MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES PARACHUTES TRAILERS BODY ARMOR LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLES SURVIVAL VESTS |
|
What say we take a walk through the Boeing employee parking lots...I just know we aren't going to find any Toyotas, Hondas, Subarus, Volkwagens.....etc...etc.....talk the talk...but they won't walk the walk. I notice Boeing was going to phase out the 767 anyway......why?....it's obsolete..old news. But I guess sticking the Air Force with brand new obsolete aircraft is a great idea. That contract was Boeing's to lose....and lose it they did. |
|
I'm not happy Boeing lost the contract, but the ball was in their court and they dropped it. This is gonna have a big trickle down effect on the local economy. I do think that the DOD should have its rules changed for military contracts to have a larger portion required to be USA made, however some items should be able to be outsourced if the quality and price is right. The goverment wastes enough tax dollars, so fiscal responsibility does come into play. I don't like the idea of our money going overseas, but if the bid called for a larger carrier with multiple payload options (fuel/cargo/soldiers) and all Boeing offered was a tanker, well duh, they lose. (don't know what the contract specifications were but thats what one of the talking heads was saying about why they went with EADS, multipurpose plane) |
That is not what happened. The USAF even turned down a proposal from Boeing for 777 based tankers that would have outperformed the A330 in every aspect except initial cost. |