Fórum Defesa Brasil

Aproveitando é bom re-ler esse tópico, mas com outros olhos...

http://www.defesabrasil.com/forum/viewt ... 80+air+one

[]´s

Entrevista con Carlos Suarez, responsable de la división de transporte militar de EADS:

http://www.aviaciondigitalglobal.com/no ... DesignId=3

The Forces Against Tanker Win Gather


I got an email from a congressional source in Rep. Norm Dicks' (D-Wash.) office over the weekend that foreshadows the upcoming fight on the Hill over giving those rotten Frenchies and their Euro pals billions of U.S. tax dollars for something red-blooded Americans can build better themselves (or that's what the anti-NorGrum/EADS forces are probably thinking deep down).

Attached is the letter that Sen. McCain sent to Robert Gates as he was being confirmed ... saying that the competition should not include a consideration of the WTO dispute. The result was that the Air Force a month later dropped the provision in the draft RFP that would have attempted to account for the subsidy that the USTR is alleging has gone into the A330 program. That was one of the key changes that ultimately cleared the way for the EADS-Northrop win.

Protectionism cloaked in legalistic trade jargon seems to be the first salvo fired by Boeing backers so far -- unless you count former presidential hopeful Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) who threw in a little Cold War redbaiting by basically describing EADS/Airbus as a "socialist" government-supported monopoly.

Reuters pulled the issue together well over the weekend, and I'll bet you a million bucks whoever is facing McCain in the general election will blame him for losing American jobs by scuttling the Boeing lease deal and hinting in a letter to Sec. Gates that the Air Force might be attempting to negate the A330's edge on cargo capacity (the letter was supplied by the Dicks source).

Stay tuned folks. You think the CSAR-X deal/protest was a hot one? This KC-X debate is going to get worse before it gets any better.

-- Christian

Carta do Senador McCain para Robert Gates:

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/arc ... letter.pdf

By Andrea Shalal-Esa - Analysis Sun Mar 2, 1:57 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A surprising U.S. decision to bypass Boeing Co (BA.N) and award Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N) and Europe's EADS (EAD.PA) a $35 billion aerial tanker deal underscores the global nature of the defense market, and will clearly be a hot topic in U.S. national politics this year.
ADVERTISEMENT

Signed late on Friday by Northrop and the Air Force, the fixed-price deal is an enormous boon for No. 3 U.S. defense company Northrop, dramatically expands EADS's foothold in the U.S. market and hastens the end of the Boeing 767 production line.

But with the U.S. economy in a slump and Boeing backers howling about potential job losses to Europe, U.S. lawmakers could still hold up the deal, and it may become a football in the presidential election.

The likely Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, led an investigation that killed an earlier Air Force proposal to lease 100 Boeing 767 tankers after a former top Air Force official went to jail for negotiating a senior job with Boeing as she was still overseeing that deal and others.

Now, opponents say, he has helped hand the huge deal to EADS, the parent company of Airbus. Northrop says 60 percent of its plane will be made in America and even the fuselage and tail of the Boeing 767 would have been built overseas, but "Buy America" rhetoric is an easy sell in hard financial times.

"The last bastion of the losing protectionist is to wave the bloody 'Buy America' shirt," said analyst Joel Johnson of the Teal Group. "It tells you they don't have another argument -- e.g., the (Northrop) product was newer, more capable and less risky."

Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, still vying for their party's nomination, have not addressed the deal, but the issue of U.S. jobs going overseas is clearly on their radar.

Their Democratic colleagues in the Senate and House of Representatives are already raising questions about McCain's role in convincing the Air Force to take the U.S.-European dispute over airplane subsidies out of the competition.

"The U.S. government is bringing an action against Airbus in the World Trade Organization and subsidies should have been taken into account" in this competition, Rep. Norm Dicks, a Washington Democrat, told Reuters.

McCain urged Robert Gates, before he was confirmed as defense secretary, to remove the issue from the terms of the competition, saying it could eliminate one of the bidders from the start.

"McCain wrote a very strong letter to Gates," Dicks said. "Clearly it was on the side of Airbus."

Dicks said the Air Force would face tough questions in Congress. "Here we are in a recession and the U.S. government hands such a big contract to the Europeans," he said.

On the flip side, the U.S. military already buys weapons overseas, including a new Army helicopter built by EADS, and a presidential helicopter built in part by Italy's Finmeccanica (SIFI.MI). Britain's BAE Systems (BAES.L) has long been a key player, even on classified systems, and is now the 8th-biggest U.S. defense contractor after its 2005 takeover of combat vehicle maker United Defense Industries.

"Globalization is the way of the world," said Marc Lindsley, director of business development for Northrop.

JOBS HOT BUTTON ISSUE

Boeing supporters decry the deal as "a blow to the American aerospace industry, American workers and America's men and women in uniform," but Northrop insists its plan will create more than 2,500 positions in Alabama and other states still recovering from the devastation of 2005's Hurricane Katrina.

Overall, Northrop says the deal will support 25,000 jobs in 49 U.S. states, and its officials remain convinced that Boeing's claim of supporting 44,000 jobs was exaggerated.

Boeing only projected the earlier tanker deal to support 25,000 to 30,000 jobs, and says its C-17 transport plane, built solely in the United States, supports 25,000 jobs.

European leaders welcomed the decision. French President Nicolas Sarkozy predicted it would strengthen ties between the United States and Europe. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said EADS won in "a fair and open process" and the decision showed the mutual trust in U.S.-European national security ties.

Defense analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group said it marked the first time in U.S. military procurement -- and possibly worldwide -- that a government had chosen "a foreign plane over a directly competing domestic product."

The deal marks a personal victory for Northrop Chief Executive Ron Sugar, who analysts say had to repeatedly convince a skeptical board to back the venture with EADS.

It is an enormous coup for Ralph Crosby, a retired U.S. military officer who served in Vietnam and former senior Northrop executive who was passed over for the job Sugar got.

Crosby helped create EADS North America, which has won work building a small Army helicopter and maritime patrol planes for the Coast Guard. But the tanker was clearly his holy Grail.

The victory is particularly sweet for Crosby, whose chief rival at Northrop, James Roche, went on to become the Air Force secretary who championed the earlier Boeing tanker deal, but was later forced to resign as the scandal deepened.

In internal e-mails disclosed by McCain's investigation, Roche was clearly shown to be working closely with Boeing, writing "Go Boeing," referring to "the fools in Paris and Berlin," and expressing animosity toward Crosby. Crosby and Roche were both passed over for the top Northrop job.

NORTHROP BOOM PASSES FUEL

The deal also marks a technological achievement for EADS, which was shut out of the earlier tanker deal because it had not yet developed a boom to pass fuel to fighter aircraft.

On Friday, as the announcement neared, Northrop conducted its first flying transfer of 2,000 pounds of fuel to an F-16 fighter through its newly developed boom, although company officials decided not to publish the news until Monday.

Boeing has said only that it is disappointed and will review its options after a detailed briefing from the Air Force.

Defense analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute said lawmakers would pressure Boeing to protest the decision, but it would likely lose since it got lower scores in four out of five evaluation areas. "It is a fact that the Boeing plane couldn't beat the Airbus plane," he said.

Long delays in Boeing's deliveries to Japan and Italy were also a big negative, Aboulafia noted.

Air Force officials warn a protest could delay work on the new aircraft for 18-24 months and harm U.S. troops. Even under the current plan, some of the current KC-135 tankers will still be flying until 2040, when they are more than 80 years old.

Given the Air Force's glowing assessment of the Northrop plane, Thompson said lawmakers might have a tough time arguing too strenuously for the Boeing 767.

"Congress can stop any Pentagon expenditure it wants. But it faces the dilemma of having to explain why it wants to force war fighters to buy an inferior plane," he said.

Instead of trying to derail the Northrop deal, lawmakers could also add money to the program and require the Air Force to buy both planes, but tight budgets have already forced delays in purchases of other weapons such as warships.

"That would be a good solution, but we just don't have the money," said one congressional aide.

(Editing by Maureen Bavdek)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080302/bs_ ... anker_dc_1

Eu estou dizendo: os Republicanos já se deram conta (finalmente) da c*gada monumental que fizeram à economia ianque e estão entregando a Presidência de mão beijada aos Democratas...

Num momento em que o desemprego aumenta e o PIB chacoalha, eles dão um contrato multibilionário aos europeus...

Não bastou botarem pra concorrer a versão ianque do nosso 'picolé de chuchu', para se garantirem totalmente, fizeram esta agora...

Beronha escreveu:pENA a embraer não ter conseguido o acs

O que tem a ver o ACS com o KCX americano?

cb_lima escreveu:

Sintra escreveu:Ainda não acredito
E está confirmadissimo!

Neste momento deve estar a escorrer sangue de dentro de algum gabinete no interior da sede da Boeing!

Abraços

Pois é...

A Boeing achou que ainda estava na década de 80 e não se tocou que determinadas táticas já não são mais válidas hoje em dia.

É a EH levando o Heli do Presidente
A Eurocopter levando Heli 'leve' do US Army
A Airbus levando o KC-45
Se cuida concorrência, pois vem aí ACS 2.0 - Embraer ... a Revanche

Parabéns a Airbus que mostrou que é muito díficil contrariar uma proposta sólida quando a sua base é bem fundamentada...

Fica aí a lição


[]s
CB_Lima

Deveriam ter oferecido sempre o 777, mas...

Pedro Gilberto escreveu:

Bolovo escreveu:Olha só, 179 KC-45!

Isso abre portas para a Embraer no ACS...

Eu acho o contrário.....o ACS ir pra Boeing como consolação.

[]´s

A Boeing já ganhou um bom prêmio, o P-8A, o C-45A(US Navy) e tb os FA-18EF, T-45, etc...

[]s

cicloneprojekt escreveu:

Luís Henrique escreveu:Abriram as porteiras.

O ACS é nosso...

Digo ,da LM, mas a Embraer vai levar também.

Luís Henrique, temo que seja justamente o CONTRÁRIO, até porque o ACS só deve ser decidido com o novo presidente. E só deus sabe se vai dar o Somali Obama ou o vovô(claro que vai ser o Somali).

E Os demo-cratas vão favorecer uma proposta americana justamente pelo fato de a Boeing ter levado pau no KCX. Será o prêmio de consolação para a turma de Seattle.

Caro Amigo,

O 737 já foi recusado como plataforma ACS se não me engano, por conta da USArmy, já que a plataforma deve de ser a mesma para as duas forças, quem a Boeing pode oferecer?

[]s

Congresistas estadounidenses protestan por la decisión y salen en defensa de Boeing:

http://www.elmundo.es/mundodinero/2008/ ... 1204617647

Alitson escreveu:

cicloneprojekt escreveu: Luís Henrique, temo que seja justamente o CONTRÁRIO, até porque o ACS só deve ser decidido com o novo presidente. E só deus sabe se vai dar o Somali Obama ou o vovô(claro que vai ser o Somali).

E Os demo-cratas vão favorecer uma proposta americana justamente pelo fato de a Boeing ter levado pau no KCX. Será o prêmio de consolação para a turma de Seattle.

Caro Amigo,

O 737 já foi recusado como plataforma ACS se não me engano, por conta da USArmy, já que a plataforma deve de ser a mesma para as duas forças, quem a Boeing pode oferecer?

[]s

Ao contrário Alitson, o ACS foi recusado pela US Navy que hoje utiliza o P-3 como plataforma. O US Army utiliza King Air como plataforma, assim ao usar o ERJ-145 seria um salto e tanto.

Ocorre que a USN já selecionou como substituto dos P-3, o 737 e, creio, que não deseja desenvolver outra plataforma para seu uso, ainda mais de menor capacidade. Por isso o ACS foi suspenso para desarmar os lobbies.

Portanto se o ACS retornar o lobbie do 737 será mais intenso. O que podemos torcer é para separar o ACS em 2: um para o US Army e outro para a USN, mas aí o programa deixaria de ser "Common"

[]´s

Parece que a Embraer ofereceu o E 175 e o E 190 que sao bem mais baratos que o B 737

O A 350 esta previsto a primeira entrega para outubro de 2012 (se nao houver atrasos) a Qatar Airways sera a empresa Louncher .
O B 777 200 LR custa somente o equivalente a 2 A330F.

Essa e a questao que a Boeing entrou com o B 767 .

jacquessantiago escreveu:

P44 escreveu:atenção que o 787 TAMBÉM está a sofrer atrasos (toma, para quem gozava com o A-380 ) , vi na TV que a JAL (Japan Air Lines) que até hj só opera Boeings, está a considerar encomendar AIRBUS pela primeira vez na sua história

Boeing, boeing ,boing

O concorrente do 787 sera o A350, cujo cronograma esta mais para o futuro ainda.

Restam o 777 e o A330. Como a JAL jah opera 777...

Pedro Gilberto escreveu:

Alitson escreveu: Caro Amigo,

O 737 já foi recusado como plataforma ACS se não me engano, por conta da USArmy, já que a plataforma deve de ser a mesma para as duas forças, quem a Boeing pode oferecer?

[]s

Ao contrário Alitson, o ACS foi recusado pela US Navy que hoje utiliza o P-3 como plataforma. O US Army utiliza King Air como plataforma, assim ao usar o ERJ-145 seria um salto e tanto.

Ocorre que a USN já selecionou como substituto dos P-3, o 737 e, creio, que não deseja desenvolver outra plataforma para seu uso, ainda mais de menor capacidade. Por isso o ACS foi suspenso para desarmar os lobbies.

Portanto se o ACS retornar o lobbie do 737 será mais intenso. O que podemos torcer é para separar o ACS em 2: um para o US Army e outro para a USN, mas aí o programa deixaria de ser "Common"

[]´s

A US Navy recusou o ERJ-145 e a US Army recusou o 737, foi justamente o que eu tentei fazer entender. Não vejo a US Army operando 737, mas sim no máximo um 190. E hoje os americanos não estão conseguindo mais $$$$ para desenvolver 10 programas iguais em plataformas diferentes para suas forças...

[]s

Alitson escreveu:

Pedro Gilberto escreveu: Ao contrário Alitson, o ACS foi recusado pela US Navy que hoje utiliza o P-3 como plataforma. O US Army utiliza King Air como plataforma, assim ao usar o ERJ-145 seria um salto e tanto.

Ocorre que a USN já selecionou como substituto dos P-3, o 737 e, creio, que não deseja desenvolver outra plataforma para seu uso, ainda mais de menor capacidade. Por isso o ACS foi suspenso para desarmar os lobbies.

Portanto se o ACS retornar o lobbie do 737 será mais intenso. O que podemos torcer é para separar o ACS em 2: um para o US Army e outro para a USN, mas aí o programa deixaria de ser "Common"

[]´s

A US Navy recusou o ERJ-145 e a US Army recusou o 737, foi justamente o que eu tentei fazer entender. Não vejo a US Army operando 737, mas sim no máximo um 190. E hoje os americanos não estão conseguindo mais $$$$ para desenvolver 10 programas iguais em plataformas diferentes para suas forças...

[]s

OK meu caro, entendido. Também concordo e por isso minha sugestão no final do post: necessidades diferentes geram requisitos diferentes e deveriam ser atendidos por soluções diferentes. Mas como voce ressaltou, em não existindo verba para todos, das duas uma, ou prioriza, ou compartilha a mesma solução. Vamos ver como os gringos vão se arranjar.

[]´s