Air Force officials say European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co., parent company of Airbus, built a $100 million fuel boom on spec to demonstrate its technological know-how.
Boeing, meanwhile, promised a new boom but didn’t build a prototype.
It was that kind of aggressive one-upmanship from EADS/Northrop Grumman that apparently made the difference with Air Force officials, according to a New York Times story.
“Northrop Grumman brought their A game,†Sue C. Payton, assistant secretary of the Air Force, told Congress last week.
Questions remain, though, whether the playing field was fair.
16 Comments
The main reason that Airbus put the added effort in is to force airports to make provisions for landing of the A380.
At present there are just a handful of airports that have the facilities necessary to handle the
A380.
Boeing = Arrogance.
And it cost them.
Okay, so they didn;t build a prototype. Not asked for in the RFP (see the discussion yesterday about the importance of that). In fact, protoptypes are not usually built unless requested. In the past, that was a totally separate rfp. In any case, the aircraft industry (and presumably the Air Force) often sells aircraft that are on paper only, with no prototype yet built. Common industry practice. Just FYI for those not familiar with the industry.
sorry- the air force does not sell planes often.
THe sentence should have read:”
In any case, the aircraft industry (and presumably the Air Force knows this) often sells aircraft that are on paper only, with no prototype yet built.
In any case, the aircraft industry (and presumably the Air Force knows this) often sells aircraft that are on paper only, with no prototype yet built.
Why does that frightne me?
It shouldn;t.
The process to actually certify an airplane is a long and arduous one. The cost is usually guranteed for the first so many units. The delivery dates are pretty much guranteed also, but sometimes slip (especially in leading edge aircraft like the 787 or the airbus 380).
In high school I was working on STOL conversions. the certification was long and arduous. WITH SEVERAL WORKING AIRCRAFT! If they were that picky 35 years ago, I can only assume they’re much worse now. There’s an old adage: The government can waste all kinds of money, but they can’t afford one death. I remind you of the shuttle disasters.
Another view:
Airbus KNEW that the deck was actually stacked in their favor, thus the willingness of Airbus to spend some money on their proposal.
So boing, knowing the deck was stacked against them didn’t try knowing they could just cry?
Why do I say that the deck stacked in favor of Airbus? I refer you to to the comments on previous Tanker threads.
The real battle was fought when the Request document was submitted and amended.
I still have strong doubts that any money will be appropriated for this project any time soon.
A prototype is usually built AFTER the design has been selected in a two step procurement process. There may be one RFP for design, another for prototype building and building for destructive testing, and then the actual manufacturing of the item.
Obviously, the design and mfg go together when it comes to aircraft, even if most of the building will be outsourced to subs or partners.
EADS proved its design would work. They proved it at their own expense. Boeing didnt.
And paulie, fer cryin’ out loud. If EADS KNEW it had the contract in the bag, why would they build the prototype at their own expense? For show?
Boeing and the Kansas delegation led by todd just got outplayed. And now they want a do-over.
Boeing employees are aero-gant and full of themselves.
The A330-200 turned out to be the right size and specs aircraft. Boeing could have tried the767-300 or even 400 but I suspect that even that would not have done the trick. Anyone can look at the specs for these aircrafts an compare to the 330-200. Also, the 777-200 would definitely been over-kill.
Top – but nowhere near as arrogant and full of themselves as Boeing executives.
Was EADS really so hungry for the contract that they blew $100 million to build a boom on spec?
Not quite:
http://tinyurl.com/2j99b5
The manufacturing guys over at Evolving Excellence have also been taking Boeing to task, first in terms of the hypocrisy of whining about losing the tanker deal to NG/Airbus at:
http://www.evolvingexcellence.com/blog/2008/03/boeing-whiner-e.html
Then the even greater hypocrisy of the politicians that are siding with Boeing:
http://www.evolvingexcellence.com/blog/2008/03/so-whos-more-pa.html
Ken