The French aircraft manufacturer tells today's Times they are OK with splitting the huge air tanker contract with rival Boeing...so long as the factory they will build in Mobile constructs at least a dozen planes a year. Senators Shelby and Sessions have been blocking a key Pentagon nomination to make it more likely EADS/Grumman will get the contract. One other Congressman wondered in the N.Y. Times earlier this month what all the fuss is: Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, says a no-frills tanker should be easy enough for either company to build. "It's just a flying gasoline tank," he said. "It's not the F-22 or the Battlestar Galactica."
Sounds strangely like extortion, bribery and/or quid pro quo.
ReplyDeleteextortion: obtain (something) by force, threats, or other unfair means
bribe: persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically {though not always} illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement
quid pro quo: favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something
Sounds also like Boeing is AFRAID of competition, AND a CRYBABY.
"Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates opposes dividing the contract, which could be extended for decades and eventually cost $100 billion for more than 400 tankers."
"EADS, which makes the Airbus planes, is Boeing’s biggest competitor for commercial airliners. It has also been pushing hard to expand its military contracting in the United States.
"But after Northrop Grumman and EADS won the contract last year, Boeing filed a protest contending that the bidding process had been flawed. Several of its complaints eventually led the Air Force to cancel the contract and start over.
Sounds also like USAF officials were in the wrong.
"...Air Force officials provided detailed cost information from their {EADS/Grumman} bid to Boeing in explaining how the decision had been reached."