Defense outsourcing

Your article on Boeing's shocking loss to French manufacturer European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co.

[Eagle 1]

Hmmm, coming from a VP of a labor union, I cannot help but wonder if there is a bias to this. Giving the benefit of the doubt, meeting DOD requirements and specs is generally not a minor task for a large scale system. I'd venture that a detailed discussion is way beyond the scope of newsprint. That said, look at our std. sidearm - Beretta (Italian). Beretta did however build a factory in the USA to produce the sidearms. Of course, if EADS went so far as to build a factory in the US, it probably would not choose a location Mr. Michalski would support.

[nva guy]

Right on & they are building a plant in the US.

Also we have agreements with a number of countries that make them the same as the US in purchases. And guess what France is one of them.

Facts are great but don't expect all or maybe any from the unions.

[sevuvia]

get used to it.
there's nothing such thing as the
united states of america.
it's just a p.o. box to register a corporate name
and a venue to market product.

[Matt S]

The French made A330 was indeed the product of a 5 Billion dollar subsidy that was given to Airbus in order to unfairly crush the American competition, Boeing. Airbus continues to low-ball bids with airlines worldwide thanks to the Euro taxpayer's money. These subsidies are at the heart of the US WTO complaint against Airbus/EADS and the same moneys that have over the years taken tens of thousands of highly paid skilled jobs from US and led to the fall of an aerospace giant McDonnell Douglas.(which Boeing bought to keep EADS/Airbus from taking that cherry from us as well)

Point of reference for the law that allowed the French to compete:

Sadly, it was the GOP-led Congress, normally a steadfast champion of American business interests, that passed the amendment in '04 allowing certain NATO member foreign entitites to bid and win defense contracts. Voting on that amendment was along party lines.

"Right on & they are building a plant in the US."

Airbus has promised jobs overseas before and on more than a few occasions, rescinded their promises at a later date citing various reasons to keep the jobs in France, Spain and Germany. The USAF tanker contract contains language that allows EADS/Airbus to do the same to Alabama. Even if the plant was built, the assembly process is peanuts compared to the real gravy, which is the construction of the wings, tail and fuselage - all done in Europe.

The Airbus KC-30 is over-sized for the job. The Boeing KC-767 is tailored to the mission. The KC-767 is more battle hardened by design than the computerized Airbus. The KC-767 is more flexible at critical forward positions during conflicts, while the A330's only claim to fame would be it's cargo carrying abilities. The Air Force already has a perfectly fine fleet of C-5s and the smaller C-17s for cargo.

There are serious issues with the Airbus A330 fly-by-wire system and how Airbus will modify their programmed flight computers to allow Air Force pilots ultimate control of the aircraft. As it is now, the Normal Law flight controls on an Airbus will lock a pilot out during an emergency or abrupt maneuver. The fly-by-wire system is also considered inferior when it comes to crosswind landings. Airbus fly-by-wire has more shortcomings at the edges of the flight envelope than a conventional flight control system such as the one on the KC-767.

The KC-767 is the best airplane for the Air Force, for the warfighters, and for American workers and our economy. Only by keeping large contracts within the US will we be able to preserve at least some of our industrial base and keep the US at the forefront of aerospace technology.

[nva guy]

Matt S wrote:

The French made A330 was indeed the product of a 5 Billion dollar subsidy that was given to Airbus in order to unfairly crush the American competition, Boeing.
The KC-767 is the best airplane for the Air Force, for the warfighters, and for American workers and our economy. Only by keeping large contracts within the US will we be able to preserve at least some of our industrial base and keep the US at the forefront of aerospace technology.

Good post. While I don't agree with your conclusions it is always helpful to hear another reasoned side.

[Stan]

It's always amusing to see fellow English speakers across the pond get all uptight when a US made product doesn't make the grade against a European one.
Oh and by, the way there are 15,000 Brits employed by EADS you've just pissed off by calling them French.
What would be the result for the American workers if Europeans applied a similar protectionist ideology? You'd see a lot of people in Boeing and other defence companies getting sacked. European purchases of US defence equipment employs a lot of people and keep many families fed!
To take the view that US defence equipment should be US designed and made would result in the US army having a much reduced offensive capability.
The M249 SAW FN (Belgian), the M240 is FN (Belgium), the M252 mortar BAE (UK), M68A1 105 mm tank gun BAE (UK), the M256 120 mm tank gun Rheinmetall (German), M777 155 mm howitzer BAE (UK), M92 Berreta (Italy), M11 9mm Sig Sauer (Swiss/German), M119 105 mm Howitzer BAE (UK), LAV Mowag (Swiss), the list goes on...
The fact of the matter is if Boeing had put forward the KC-777, the foreign content would have been equal to or more than the KC30! The 777 has the highest foreign content of any US assembled aircraft.
A little food for thought is why did the Australians who buy almost exclusively US made equipment not buy the KC-767? Because the KC-30 was better and more importantly is the range 7700 miles vs 5800 for the 767. In the asia-pacific theatre that's a huge plus.
And where might you think the next hot spot for the US will be? My bets are the asia-pacific theatre.
Jobs, to be honest, are secondary to equipping your troops with the best.
We've made that mistake too many times here in the UK. Learn from our mistakes and make sure your troops have the best, not what looks good to politicians!

[UPform5]

Go outsourcing!