Northrop Drops out of Tanker Competition
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
787?
Maybe they don't want the risk of a plastic fuel container.
UAVs are taking over faster than most people seem to admit. We don't need a $350 Million 21st century F-22 manned fighter against a medieval foe. With the fighters go the tankers.
It couldn't be too tough to convert used 757s. They're even the same fuselage as the KC-135. They would be good for another ten years or so.
Without worthy enemies, the Air Forces are just very expensive flying clubs.
GB
UAVs are taking over faster than most people seem to admit. We don't need a $350 Million 21st century F-22 manned fighter against a medieval foe. With the fighters go the tankers.
It couldn't be too tough to convert used 757s. They're even the same fuselage as the KC-135. They would be good for another ten years or so.
Without worthy enemies, the Air Forces are just very expensive flying clubs.
GB
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 49
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@taildragger67
"The 767, whilst a great aircraft, is over 30-year-old technology (some bit probably older still). If the new tankers mimic the KC135, they'll be around for at least 40 - so that will mean a 70-plus-year-old programme."
You forgot to add the time Boeing needs to put this a/c into service. IF they'll receive the contract for the remaining 100+ tanker you'll probably need to add another 15 or 20 years.
The lack of competition will raise the costs in the end - that's a fact. Take a look at the A400M. Also NG/Airbus wanted to assemble the a/c in the US. A lot of new workers to be hired in the US. You may say: "Boeing will hire new staff" but Airbus also considered assembling civil aircraft in the future avoiding currency exchange rate changes which would need additional workforce.
Long story short: I am not really unhappy about their decision. This will keep the Airbus A330MRTT to be build in Europe as well as future civil aircraft.
"The 767, whilst a great aircraft, is over 30-year-old technology (some bit probably older still). If the new tankers mimic the KC135, they'll be around for at least 40 - so that will mean a 70-plus-year-old programme."
You forgot to add the time Boeing needs to put this a/c into service. IF they'll receive the contract for the remaining 100+ tanker you'll probably need to add another 15 or 20 years.
The lack of competition will raise the costs in the end - that's a fact. Take a look at the A400M. Also NG/Airbus wanted to assemble the a/c in the US. A lot of new workers to be hired in the US. You may say: "Boeing will hire new staff" but Airbus also considered assembling civil aircraft in the future avoiding currency exchange rate changes which would need additional workforce.
Long story short: I am not really unhappy about their decision. This will keep the Airbus A330MRTT to be build in Europe as well as future civil aircraft.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real fun bit will be when Uncle Sam needs some other aircraft. If EADS declines to bid, who will compete against Boeing? And when they win (again), how much will it cost the US taxpayer because I for one believe that Boeing can be trusted to price fairly as much as I believe in fairies at the end of my garden. And will Boeing now be invited to bid for other European projects? I hope not.
PM
PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 69
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's headlines
Sarkozy's visit heralds better US-French ties - The Boston Globe
And in a remarkable coincidence
Pentagon will extend deadline for tanker bids | al.com
Sarkozy's visit heralds better US-French ties - The Boston Globe
And in a remarkable coincidence
Pentagon will extend deadline for tanker bids | al.com
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,121
Received 2,959 Likes
on
1,263 Posts
This will be an American company with American workers
Structure
Fail-safe structure. Conventional aluminium structure augmented by graphite ailerons, spoilers, elevators, rudder and floor panels; advanced aluminium alloy keel beam chords and wing skins; composites engine cowlings, wing/fuselage fairing and rear wing panels; CFRP landing gear doors; and aramid flaps and engine pylon fairings.
Subcontractors include Boeing Military Aircraft (wing fixed leading-edges); Northrop Grumman (wing centre-section and adjacent lower fuselage section; fuselage bulkheads); Vought Aircraft (horizontal tail); Canadair (rear fuselage); Alenia (wing control surfaces, flaps and leading-edge slats, wingtips, elevators, fin and rudder, nose radome); Fuji (wing/body fairings and main landing gear doors); Kawasaki (forward and centre fuselage; exit hatches; wing in-spar ribs); Mitsubishi (rear fuselage body panels and rear fuselage doors).
Jane's All The World's Aircraft Entry - Boeing 767
