Spokane7
62°
April 20, 2010 in Nation/World, Region
EADS goes alone in bid on U.S. tanker contract
WASHINGTON — A European defense contractor said Tuesday that will make its own bid for the U.S. Air Force’s long-delayed $35 billion contract to build a fleet of new refueling jets after its U.S. partner dropped out.
The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company, also known as EADS, opens a new chapter in the bitterly disputed and politically sensitive Pentagon effort to replace its fleet of KC-135 refueling tankers that date back to the 1950s.
EADS is challenging Boeing Co., a U.S. company, for the right to build 179 new planes for the Air Force. EADS’ one-time American partner, Northrop Grumman Corp., backed out earlier this year after saying the Pentagon project unfairly favored Boeing.
“When you’ve got the best, you gotta offer it,” said Ralph Crosby, chairman of the EADS North America division.
The Pentagon has tried for nearly a decade to award the tanker contract, which is expected to be the first in a $100 billion overall program to replace the current fleet of KC-135 planes. Past attempts have failed repeatedly for reasons ranging from bungling by the Pentagon to the criminal conviction of a top Defense Department official.
The Air Force formally reopened the bidding earlier this year. Boeing said it would try again, but Northrop decided not to make an offer. Northrop has complained that the Air Force’s guidelines for the plane were slanted toward Boeing’s smaller plane.
That sparked claims of protectionism from European leaders who said the Pentagon is giving an unfair competitive advantage to Boeing, based in Chicago. President Obama assured French President Nicolas Sarkozy last month that the bidding process would be fair and transparent.
Faced with the prospect of awarding a contract with no competition, the Pentagon agreed to extend a deadline to give EADS more time to bid. Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said that the department welcomed the EADS announcement and that it believes “any company that is interested and qualified to participate in this important program should do so.”
An EADS win would give its Airbus subsidiary a foothold in the U.S. market for military transport planes that is now largely dominated by Boeing. EADS plans to offer a military version of its A330 passenger jet made by Airbus, a subsidiary. Militaries such as the Royal Australian Air Force have already ordered versions of the plane.
Company officials stressed that it would be built by the EADS North American unit with help from U.S. companies like General Electric Co. and Honeywell International Inc. EADS plans to build the jet at a new plant in Mobile, Ala.
But Boeing, which has big manufacturing centers in Washington state and Kansas, has strong support in Congress. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., sharply criticized the inclusion of EADS, pointing to a recent World Trade Organization ruling that found European governments had illegally subsidized Airbus.
“It means we are bending over backwards to include a company that has broken the rules of fair play,” Murray said.
Boeing echoed that sentiment in a statement, but said it is “confident in the superior value and capabilities” of its entry.
© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Obama honors Medal of Freedom recipients as heroes 
Another_Perspective on April 20 at 2:36 p.m.
“It means we are bending over backwards to include a company that has broken the rules of fair play,” Murray said.
She is talking about the secret sweet heart present to Boeing by Darlene Druyan and Mike Sears…
and dont forget the $3 Billion dollar bend over (not backwards) that Gary Locke gave Boeing.
Murray is delusional.
johnclarke on April 20 at 3:11 p.m.
I appreciate she is fighting for Boeing, that is her job. However, could we PLEASE buy our fighting men and women a new tanker already? Hell, those KC-135’s are older than me, and that’s pretty old. It’s bad enough our team has to fight the enemy, and aging equipment. Get on it politicians ! Maybe we should make our elected officials start flying space A on KC-135’s.
Another_Perspective on April 20 at 5:21 p.m.
uh john.. no Murrays job is to pass laws and budgets. Not to unduly and illegally influence the supposed fair bidding process to provide our military the most COST efficient weapons according to their mission criteria regardless of where they come from.
I also hate to burst yer bubble.. but what does a KC-135 do? It passes gas. It doesnt take a Cadilac Escalade to do that. Any old aluminum overcast can perform that mission. it doesnt pull a lot of g’s when flying straight and level. Well one g that is.
Besides its not “our” team unless you have been annointed as the spokesperson for every citizen.
The reason why its taken 10 years was Murray’s under the table secret deal to lease them at TWICE the cost than if we had just bought them outright. You can squarely put the blame on ol Bin Laden Murray for sticking her fingers into a process that politicians should stay out of.. and some our less erudite posters too. If we had less pot stirrers the jello would have solidified a long long time ago.
So now thanks to Bin Laden Murray the cost of the Tankers has inflated from $3 Billion to over $35 B I L L I O N.
One should study the pulitzer winning expose called the “favor factory” by the S.T./P.I. Murray is right up there on the top pork list buying ships the Coast Guard didnt need, want and are now drydocked.
johnclarke on April 21 at 9:19 a.m.
AP- I will read the favor factory. Thank you for that. My point - and I’m not sure why you want to turn my comment personal - but ok. When I say “our” team, I am refering to the military community. Have you flown on a KC-135? Do you have military background? Even if you do, you obviously don’t know how important tankers are to the mission. First, there is no kicking a** without tanker gas. Maybe you can explain how to quickly deploy a wing of fighters or A-10’s around the globe without a tanker? While you are at it, tell me how to perform a long range rescue mission? Tankers fly into combat zones all the time, and many a pilot and crewmember owes thier lives to the brave men and women who fly those “aluminum overcasts” as you put it. They fly unarmed aircraft designed in the 50’s, and they will risk thier lives to ensure “our team” makes it home. They deserve the best. You can punish Murray wiith your vote, but let’s not punish our fighters.