US News
Pentagon yanks tanker contract from EADS (Roundup)
Jul 9, 2008, 22:25 GMT
A handout illustration provided by EADS/Northrop Grumman showing a tanker aircraft KC-30 during the refuelling of a US B2 bomber in the air. EPA/EADS/NORTHROP GRUMMAN
Washington - The Pentagon has reopened bidding on the contract for the next generation of Air Force refueling tankers, which were originally awarded to the European defence firm EADS, US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday.
The Pentagon will ask EADS, along with US partner Northrop Grumman, and rival Boeing to submit revised proposals following a finding by the GAO, a congressional investigative agency, that the Air Force's decision in favour of EADS was flawed, Gates said.
'I've concluded that the contract cannot be awarded at present because of significant issues pointed out by the Government Accountability Office,' Gates said.
A new winner for the 35-billion-dollar contract to build 179 KC-X aerial refuellers will be awarded through an expedited process to be completed by December, in what will be a limited competition to address the GAO concerns.
'It is important to remember that this decision does not represent a return to the first step of a process that has already gone on far too long,' Gates said, adding that the need to replace the Air Force's ageing fleet of tankers was 'time critical.'
In a report issued June 18, the GAO upheld Boeing's formal protest that the Air Force made critical errors in awarding the contract and urged the Pentagon to reopen the competition.
John Young, undersecretary of defence for acquisition, said that the Pentagon will ask the defence firms to submit new proposals by the end of the summer.
The GAO ruled that the Air Force overlooked key aspects of the Boeing proposal that could have tilted the contract in the US-based aerospace giant's direction, and failed to inform Boeing of the Air Force's interest in a larger aircraft before choosing the Northrop- EADS bid in March.
While the GAO decision was not binding, a failure by the Pentagon to embrace the decision could have brought congressional scrutiny from lawmakers who control the defence budget.
Boeing welcomed the decision by the Pentagon to strip Northrop and EADS of the contract while saying the criteria for re-awarding the contract should not be altered.
'We welcome the decision by Defense Secretary Robert Gates not to proceed with the contract award to Northrop Grumman/EADS and to reopen the KC-X tanker competition,' Boeing said in a statement.
Northrop and EADS remained confident they will still win the contract and praised Gates for finding a quick solution to the dispute.
'The United States Air Force has already picked the best tanker, and we are confident that it will do so again,' Northrop spokesman Randy Belote said.
Northrop and EADS have not decided whether to alter their original proposal but would 'wait and see' whether the Pentagon changes the criteria, he said.
The contract was the first of three that could reach a combined value of 100 billion dollars over 30 years. Dozens of members of Congress criticized the Air Force for shipping defence jobs abroad at a time when the US economy is struggling.
Northrop Grumman and EADS had said that they would build a plant in the US state of Alabama to assemble the aircraft from parts manufactured in Europe.
GAO auditors found that Boeing offered to meet more non-mandatory requirements than Northrop and that the Boeing tanker could have come at a cheaper price over the life cycle of the programme.
EADS (the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company), the parent company of Boeing rival Airbus, is partly owned by European governments.
Boeing complained that the Air Force chose the EADS version based on an Airbus 330 after being told that its 767 met Air Force requirements. Boeing said it could have proposed its 777 instead, had it been adequately informed of the Air Force's needs.
The Air Force sparked outrage within Congress when it handed the contract to Northrop and EADS. Lawmakers complained that government contracts should not be filled abroad at a of growing US unemployment.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
another one, SP. Your comments are getting sillier as time goes on.
'by all means, take your time...'
The punchline: we don't even need new tankers.
not if soaring maintenance costs, off-line availability and obsolecence are not a concern. This is how it works:
Wing flies from US to...Italy...refueling goes with them...breaks down or needs 24 to 48 hours of work after it gets there...everyone gets two days off...
The poor sod above thinks machines last forever...honestly, why do citizens not inform themselves.
We have needed this for the last 20 YEARS! Congress and the Pentagon spend on all sorts of things except the non-sexy stuff like this. This thing, as easy to make as anything in the inventory, should have come on-line during the Clinton administration.
'The poor sod above thinks machines last forever...honestly, why do citizens not inform themselves.'
How old are our B-52s?
...we tried, 3 times, to replace them and the reason they are still around is because we failed.
So now, we have a f--kiing 50 year old Bomber, with half the carrying capacity of the B1B, one tenth the survivability of the B2, that probably costs at least twice as much to keep aloft per hour.
Other procurement Gems:
C-17 - we built them and then flew the old C141's for 30 years, while we had brand new planes with more capability, coming off the line.
B2 - cutting the number procured, raised the cost and we had ANOTHER porgram we f--ked ourselves on
B1B - the prototype for gov't f--kups. The perfect replacement for the B52 and Carter pissed it away.
F22- ditto...runaway development and cuts killed the necessary purchase and now F-15's are breaking up mid-air.
V22 - endless development for something that was never necessary
Navy Littoral Combat ship - just pick a reason...
DD21 - ditto
Congress starts cutting numbers the day they debut the program.
'..we tried, 3 times, to replace them and the reason they are still around is because we failed.'
Or because it has been more cost effective to keep them going and the alternatives don't fill the same niche as well. Replace the 8 engines with 4 turbofans and they will have another decade or two.
'with half the carrying capacity of the B1B,'
But much longer loiter time unrefueled range and versatility.
'that probably costs at least twice as much to keep aloft per hour.'
My guess is that it would be less.
The Saudies are going to fill in, to save the french industry.
In case some nut like SP4 comes up with the less than brilliant argument that you need all that stuff to defend your allies that are too lazy to provide for their own security and other blah blah...don't bother ,that stuff is useless and only on the agenda to provide more profit to the military industrial complex as described by Ike Eisenhower .To be paid for with your money.Funny how the republicans only oppose spending when education or health care is concerned .When it concerns military spending the taps are always opened widely .The poor SP4 is again the perfect example but unfortunately also the result of such spending .Kindergarten obviously is one of his two degrees.
Tonny, when you can evolve to speak to an American eye to eye then your opinion might count.
you raise no good points, Grasssmoker.
The loss of this contract is abig loss to french air bus company. The yare going to sue the US DoD. But negotiations are going on to pressure arab slave nations to compensate for those losses.
The loss of this contract is abig loss to french air bus company. The yare going to sue the US DoD. But negotiations are going on to pressure arab slave nations to compensate for those losses. So no question of bankrupcy.
As long as we have SLAVES WITH MONEY we have every thing we need.
Wake up idiot slavery is over and done with .What kind of silly ranting is that .It is more obvious that the american companies tke their own population for idiots as they have been pumping your money for decades offering nothing in return .Or are you perhaps going to eat the armament you keep producing ?You've spent trillions of dollars of good taxpayr's money to feed the greed of the armament tycoons and nothing of the stuff produced adds ro your comfort ,pleasure or lifestyle .So who's the slave now ?
'You've spent trillions of dollars of good taxpayr's money to feed the greed of the armament tycoons and nothing of the stuff produced adds ro your comfort ,pleasure or lifestyle '
And to defend your ignorant rear end.... Gee, we get so much satisfaction from that. Ill take an armaments manufacturer over a sanctimonious, effeminate, ungrateful, pompous, ignorant waffle eating surrender monkey any day.
In case some nut like SP4 comes up with the less than brilliant argument that you need all that stuff to defend your allies that are too lazy to provide for their own security and other blah blah...don't bother
sp4 - actually, it is simply America serving itself here...
,that stuff is useless and only on the agenda to provide more profit to the military industrial complex as described by Ike Eisenhower .
sp4 - curious because he never invented the term until he'd won the war he was responsible for winning...
To be paid for with your money.
sp4 - who elses?
Funny how the republicans only oppose spending when education or health care is concerned .
sp4 - actually, the republicans will have everyone insured in Massachusetts in 2 years and a pilot program for the nation. Leave it to Mitt and the republicans to come to the solution.
When it concerns military spending the taps are always opened widely .
sp4 - actually Tonny, this bid has has been 20 years overdue and a contentious bid. In fact, it's not even over yet.
The poor SP4 is again the perfect example but unfortunately also the result of such spending .
Kindergarten obviously is one of his two degrees.
sp4 - sticks and stone>
Tonny, I am a practical man. Men and women depend on these for their lives. If we need new hardware, buy it. That's all this subject deserves.
page: 1
SP4: GollyJul 9th, 2008 - 23:07:37
by all means, take your time...
Report this comment