Fueling the Tanker Wars: Boeing challenges EADS

An additional note on the ten of billions of dollars in subsidies EADS receives from European governments...the US Trade Representative has determined that these subsidies violate the Subsidies Agreement of the WTO, and has sued in the WTO to end the practice. These illegal subsidies include more than 5 billion dollars devoted to the A330 airframe.

Opppsss,

Tell the whole story. Aviation comes from the the Latin "avis" for bird. Similarly, fuselage comes from the latin "fusellus" or "fusus." The French built on that. I know. I checked my 20 lb. dictionary.

Pops,

I have to believe the USAF did due diligence on this hot potato. But your point about Airbus being subsidized is a very good one.

Oppsss,

I see the thorazine is not working-:)

Dale,

I wonder why the 787 has not been considered for the basic tanker model.

Does anybody remember the name written on the engine of the P-51? Rolls Royce. KC-135s are flying now with French SNECMA engines. The AV-8 Harrier was the product of a European consortium. The T-45 Goshawk trainer is a British design. Etc., etc.

As a purely practical matter, unless the Frogs are going to hide secret GPS transmitters on the tankers, there's no technology transfers, military secrets, etc. at stake here. They're building an airframe. The refueling boom uses a standard socket device. This doesn't mean we're giving away the blueprints to Aurora, or whatever the next-gen spyplane is.

Just my two francs.

It's a chess game.

We buy the low-tech Airbus tanker (an older passenger plane), and
then we expect as a quid-pro-quo that Germany, others will buy the high-tech F-35 to replace the Toronado.

I am an Amrican ex-pat working in Europe. First of all, Airbus is heavily subsidized by EU governments. The playing field isn't level to begin with. France wouldn't let us fly over their country when we bombed Libya. Austria wouldn't let trains containing US military supplies for Iraq pass through their country. These people are NOT our friends. We CAN NOT rely on them when we need to use military force. Why did the Pentagon change the bid specs at the last minute? Why were the congressional hearings cut off so briefly. Where's the transparency with Defense Dept. bidding? Smells like a big case of corruption to me. Oh, and one more thing...with the Dollar -Euro ratio this is the last thing we need, more dollars going overseas. If the ports deal was evil, why is this good?

as the word "Aviation" avion, and many aerospace words, i'm really sad to learn you about things you trys to use to bash at foreugn ppl,

and nevah forget, the french won more victories at military and alone in history than lots of old dynasties, specialists even noot mention the US in thier stats!

Clement Ader's creations will get more atention on this part of the ocean, now
haha

The word Fuselage is french,
seems that arsole as you can't figure out, as entrepreneur word is french, as 60% of the word you are using!

not only fries are french!

before the WWII the french planes manufacturers was world leaders, and when it comes about WWII, try to explain with the USA didn't started it as reel liberator in 1939 rather than in 1942!

what if the GI had landed in belgium?

hahaha, my grnd grand pah died on the plains of yorktown lil pricky arseole, i 've never bashed any americans, even when they was arseole morrons!

get a life

How about before we discuss the KC-45, let us accurately describe the winning team.
It is lead by NORTHROP Grumman, as in the founder's names: Jack Northrop and Leroy Grumman. EADS North America is the major associate contractor.

Otherwise, this was a pretty even-handed piece even with the somewhat 'jaunty' tone