Report: Air Force shuts Boeing out of $40 billion tanker deal

Northrop Grumman won a $40 billion Air Force contract to build refueling tankers Friday, a deal Boeing was expected to win.

(Credit: Northrop Grumman)

Boeing officials must be feeling a little bit like the New England Patriots after the aerospace giant on Friday lost out on a $40 billion Air Force deal.

According to The Wall Street Journal (subscription required to view full article), Boeing was considered the favorite to win a $40 billion deal to build midair refueling tankers for the Air Force, but lost out in the end to a consortium made up of Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defence & Space, parent company of jet maker Airbus.

"Boeing was heavily favored to win the contract," the Journal reported. "It had been on the verge of sewing up a similar tanker deal in 2001, only to see it unravel after the revelation that a top Boeing official had conducted illegal job negotiations with an Air Force acquisition official who later joined the company. That thrust Boeing into a years-long ethics scandal, and the U.S. put the contract up for rebidding."

Still, heading into the Air Force's final decision on the deal, Boeing was seen as the front-runner for the contract, and even those at Northrop Grumman were expecting to be shut out.

But the Air Force thought otherwise.

"Northrop Grumman clearly provided the best value to the government," the Journal quoted Air Force acquisitions official Sue Payton as saying.

According to the Air Force, the contract was for the right to build up to 179 tanker aircraft, to be called the KC-45A, for the Air Force.

"The tanker is our No. 1 procurement priority right now," said Air Force Gen. Duncan McNabb in a press release about the deal. "Buying the new KC-45A is a major step forward and another demonstration of our commitment to recapitalizing our Eisenhower-era inventory of these critical national assets."

The KC-45A is expected to be able to provide refueling to both Air Force and Navy planes, while its predecessor, the KC-135, must be configured for one or the other before takeoff.

[Commander_Spock]

Huh!

Well, if all of the EU (including France....) are not going to help the United States with the conflict in Iraq then others way of finding them something meaningful to do (rather than being on the sidelines) ought to have been found. Later for Boeing perhaps. ;-) !

[rward101]

NORTHRUP TANKER CONTRACT

IS THE AIR FORCE STUPID LIKE OUR PRESIDENT? DON'T YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHY WE THINK THAT ALL OF OUR ELECTED PEOPLE AND REPRESENTIVES ARE IDIOTS? WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS PROGRAM TO BE AWARDED TO AIRBUS. WHAT ABOUT AMERICAN
WORKERS TO SAY THE LEAST. WHAT ABOUT NEEDED PARTS DURING A WAR?
DO YOU THINK CHINA ,FRANCE, BRITIAN AND JAPAN WILL BE HAPPY TO SUPPLY THEM?
CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT DO YOUR RESPONSIBLE JOB. REJECT THIS RIDICULOUS DEAL. AMERICANS STAND UP FOR AMERICA WRITE TO YOUR CONGRESS PEOPLE IMMEDIATELY

[perfectblue97]

Other considerations

Firstly, this is tax payer's money. It should go to the plane that does the best job for the money. It's no use protecting American jobs if the plane is less effective at protecting American lives.

Secondly, if Europeans make these planes sing European technology then there are no issues with protecting American secrets. No matter what parts of this plane will be built outside of the US or using foreign contractors/companies. This way fewer American secrets will go outside of America

Thirdly, if Europeans build these planes, they might well buy them too. If they have good tankers then they can help with refueling in NATO/UN missions.

Lastly, these planes will be assembled in the US, so many US workers will be involved.

[Commander_Spock]

What on Earth are you talking about!

"Secondly, if Europeans make these planes sing European technology then there are no issues with protecting American secrets. No matter what parts of this plane will be built outside of the US or using foreign contractors/companies. This way fewer American secrets will go outside of America..." Name one other country in the world except Russia that can match NASA where "aerospace technologies" are concerned; or, is it "for the forests that you cannot see the trees"!

[KZGY1024]

It could be worse...

Let's just hope that this deal did not secretly involve manufacturing our stealth fighters and bombers.

I just hope that in the future that they do not hop onto the "Made In China" bandwagon.