Appel d'offre des ravitailleurs de l'USAF
| Auteur | Message | |
|
Beochien
Inscrit le 13/02/2007 |
# 11 mars 2008 20:44 | |
|
Bonsoir Vu qq part, ... ça peut être dans un des multiples liens ... que Hillary Clinton, est dans une course à la surenchère nationaliste avec Obama ... sur l' affaire Tankers Donc, rien de bon à attendre sur le front Démocrate, ils sont désespérés pour une poignée de voix ! JPRS paris (Message édité par Beochien le 11/03/2008 20h57) _________________ JPRS |
||
 
|
||
|
xmadflyer
Inscrit le 02/03/2008 |
# 11 mars 2008 20:56 | |
|
Bonsoir, Entendu la même à la radio, ça brouille l'ecoute de l'USAF et du GAO ! Salutes |
||
|
|
||
|
sihuapilapa
Inscrit le 07/02/2006 |
# 11 mars 2008 21:49 | |
|
Non pas si simple ! Meme si le president a beaucoup de pouvoirs, il ne peut imposer son avis au congres. Comme vous le soulignez, l'orgueuil a ete pique au vif, la perte de suprematie dans le domaine aeronautique a du mal a passer ... everything pisses off !! |
||
|
|
||
|
sevrien
Inscrit le 08/08/2006 |
# 11 mars 2008 22:21 | |
|
L'homme serein parle ! Pas les excité(e)s et agité(e)s ! John McCAIN ! -------------- Lien : --------- http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument CHESTERFIELD -- Sen. John McCain this morning defended the selection process for the new Air Force refueling tanker but said he was open to a review sought by allies of Boeing Co., which lost its bid for the lucrative contract. ---------- "Fair enough" ! C'est équitable ! Et inattaquable Il respecte la procédure ! Some of Boeing's defense manufacturing operations are in St. Louis. Oui ! ----------------- Boeing's loss was on the minds of several of the questioners at this morning's town hall meeting, that the presumptive Republican nominee's campaign held at Savvis Inc., an information technology company. ..... The questions were on a variety of topics, from the economy and health care to the war in Iraq. But several were on the Boeing loss. Evidemment ! ----------------- McCain noted that he had vigorously fought a previous defense contract sought by Boeing. That contract, he said, was going to cost taxpayers $6 billion more than it should. An investigation resulted in two Boeing executives going to federal prison and top company officials being forced out, McCain said. Tout ça est factuel ! Désolé pour les BCL et les adeptes du système DPO ! Il faut qu'ils 'fassent avec' ! He praised Boeing for transforming its operations after the controversy, and said the company's current executives displayed the highest ethics. C'est le moins qu'il puisse dire en faveur de Jim McNERNEY ! Bravo ! ----------------------- This time, "I had nothing to do with the contract except to insist, in writing, on several occasions, as this process went forward, that it be fair and open and transparent," he said. Prenez note ! ------------- McCain said that he believed the negotiations had fulfilled that test but that was open to a re-examination if it was warranted. "The taxpayers are our first priority," he said. He added that defense contracts should provide the best equipment at the best price and should not be used as a federal jobs program. Bien dit ! John McCAIN ne vacillera pas, ... ne déviera pas, ... par rapport à cette ligne ! Pas de "pollution politique" chez lui sur ce dossier ! |
||
|
|
||
|
Beochien
Inscrit le 13/02/2007 |
# 11 mars 2008 23:01 | |
|
Bonne nuit En tout cas pas de nouvelles de protest déposée today par Boeing, ils doivent encore suçer leurs crayons ...avec leurs avocats ... on verra demain  JPRS Paris _________________ JPRS |
||
|
|
||
|
sevrien
Inscrit le 08/08/2006 |
# 12 mars 2008 00:23 | |
|
Salut, beochien, ... juste un mot ! Ceci n'est point une justification, c'est juste pour renforcer votre petite phrase, qui, ainsi que les miennes, semblmlent avoir piqué notre as du vroum-vroum GsxR750 ! ------------ Si vroum-vroum veut vraiment avancer, il fera peut-être l'effort d'essayer dde comprendre que ce ne sont pas les extraits ou articles que nous reproduisons qui comptent, 9 fois sur 10, mais la glose qu'on y fait (faut tout de même se passer la brosse à reluire, de temps en temps, plutôt que de se cantonner dans les parties de ping-pong générées par chaque sortie de garage ou de virage qu'il nous fait ! ----------- Ci-dessus, post d'hier, 11/03/2008 à 17h26. Notre remarque sur une partie de l'article : --Mais le consortium NG-EADS ne doit pas être défavorisé en raison d'une ereur sur une dossier d'une extranéité totale par rapport à l'affaire des "Tankers"! C'est un cadre de "competitive tender", non pas d'une opération de "work-share" ! ------------ Egalement ci dessus, post d'hier, 11/03/2008, mais à 22h21, soit 5 heures plus tard, ... et ça venait de sortir, comme aurait dit notre maître Coluche (et nous ne nous fions pas à notre boule de cristal) : -- (Notre glose en italiques) : --McCain said that he believed the negotiations had fulfilled that test but that was open to a re-examination if it was warranted. "The taxpayers are our first priority," he said. He added that defense contracts should provide the best equipment at the best price and should not be used as a federal jobs program. Bien dit ! John McCAIN ne vacillera pas, ... ne déviera pas, ... par rapport à cette ligne ! Pas de "pollution politique" chez lui sur ce dossier ! ------------ Mais, à ses yeux, on ne sait que "copier / coller" ! A ses yeux ! Corrosion, c'est ça ? Oui, ... on verra demain ! Ou, pour faire plaisir à vroum-vroum, "Wait & See" |
||
|
|
||
|
lequebecois
Inscrit le 11/02/2007 |
# 12 mars 2008 00:37 | |
|
Communiqué officiel de Boeing confirmant la contestation : http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/200 ... 1b_nr.html _________________ Le bonheur est une pause entre deux emmerdes ! Adepte de la discutaille du coin du comptoir du café de la gare |
||
|
|
||
|
Raslespaquerettes
Inscrit le 06/07/2008 |
# 12 mars 2008 04:47 | |
|
Selon le site géopoliticien "www.dedefensa.org" rubrique bloc-notes. Bien qu'étant le mieu disant, le contrat rique d'échapper à NG-EADS pour des raisons politiques ou plus encore psychomogique. Sihuapilapa a raison. Ce contrat a un gout d'Exocet pour l'industrie aéronautique américaine. De meme que réapparait la conception hégémonique américaine dans l' armenement. Selon eux, il n' y a qu'une bonne coopération translatantique lorsque l'Europe achete américain et non l'inverse. A l'heure de la monté des périls au Proche et Moyen orient ainsique la montée en puissance de la Chine pour dominer le monde . Cet échec aura à un gout amer. Bonne fin de nuit. (Message édité par Raslespaquertes le 12/03/2008 04h49) (Message édité par Raslespaquertes le 12/03/2008 04h54) |
||
|
|
||
|
sevrien
Inscrit le 08/08/2006 |
# 12 mars 2008 09:47 | |
|
Salut, Ras les paquerettes ! Oui ! Le risque est purement politique ! Et nous en sommes conscients, malgré le commentaire ridicule de GsxR750. Mais les USA vont se tirer plusieurs balles dans, le pied, comme je l'ai dit ! Ce que j'ai écrit dans les deux posts, mentionnés ci-dessus, en réponse à beochien, est absolument valable. Evidemment, si John McCAIN était élu Président (et ça peut se faire ! ), malgré les dires de sihuapilapa (que je salue au passage ; et nous sommes d'accord avec lui, ... et avons toujours été conscients du risque), ... il est quasiment certain qu'aucun Politique républicain, voyant un 3ème terme de rang d'un Président issu de leur famille, ne s'opposerait à la volonté du Président, en début de mandaat, qui 'endosserait' / "would endorse" cette décision comme une priorité à exécuter, sans refus budgétaire, en indiquant bien qu'il reste deux tranches de contrat (soit les 2 tiers) à octroyer encore ! Et il y a des démcrates bien contents, et qui le resteront, de voir du boulot pour des Américains, ailleurs aux USA que là où Boeing le promet ! "The fat lady is still singing ! She has only just begun to sing !" (Message édité par sevrien le 12/03/2008 09h49) |
||
|
|
||
|
pesawat
Inscrit le 06/01/2007 |
# 12 mars 2008 10:52 | |
|
Mauvais perdant, c'est vraiment cela, cela marche que dans un sens, ouest vers est, l'europe n'a pas le droit de gagner.Des vrais gamins pretentieux qu'on a élevés en leus disant qu'ils étaient les meilleurs,il faut casser cela. Il faut accepter, c'est tout. Ils sont naifs, ils ne voient pas venir le désengouement général pour leurs avions partout dans le monde, l' arabie saoudite qui n'ecoute plus le president US,cela ne m'étonnera pas lorsque un jour viendra ils auront besoin d'une palanquée d'avions et hop chez Airbus, le qatar,les emirats arabes unis,l'asie, ils vont perdre s'ils ne mettent pas un peu de tolérance dans leurs poches! |
||
|
|
||
|
Beochien
Inscrit le 13/02/2007 |
# 12 mars 2008 11:16 | |
|
Bonjour Si c'est vraiment le contenu de la protesetation .... c'est pas épais, des places de parking !! "We complained bitterly (throughout the decision-making process) that the changes were designed to keep them in the competition," said Mark McGraw, head of Boeing's tanker program, in a conference call with reporters. Boeing (BA) said the Air Force changed requirements for how close the tanker planes could be parked, available ramp space and the strength of the tarmac. The Air Force finally picked Northrop's bid because of its larger cargo capacity, though there wasn't any indication Boeing's 767 bid wasn't big enough, the company said. "Emotion did not play into this," McGraw said of Boeing's decision to file a protest. "We were deliberate in this process and we think we were not treated fairly." JPRS Paris _________________ JPRS |
||
|
|
||
|
sevrien
Inscrit le 08/08/2006 |
# 12 mars 2008 19:12 | |
|
Lien : http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/c ... page_2.htm Texte (Extraits) : March 11, 2008, 1:11PM EST Boeing's Trouble with Tankers The Air Force's decision to buy new refueling tankers from Europe's EADS is not the first time the U.S. defense heavyweight has lost procurement bids by Carol Matlack When Britain announced plans to replace its aging fleet of military refueling aircraft, BAe Systems (BAES.L), the country's biggest defense contractor, wanted to be sure of getting a piece of the action. So it teamed up with Boeing (BA), the dominant global supplier of aerial-refueling tankers. Together, they looked like a shoo-in for the $26 billion deal. But the two defense heavyweights were shocked in 2004 when Britain chose the European Aeronautics Defence & Space Co. (EAD.PA), which had never before built tankers, to furnish a plane based on the Airbus A330 passenger jet. "There was some arrogance," recalls Paul Beaver, a London consultant who advised the British Parliament on the contract. Boeing, he says, "thought the deal must come to the Boeing and BAe consortium almost as a right, [but] from an operational standpoint, the Airbus model was far superior." -------------- Il y a des participants qui reconnaîtront que, il y a au moins 2 semaines déjà, j'avais écrit ce qui précède. C'est Businnes Wekke qui vient chez moi, pour faire du copier / coller ! Vous avez compris, enfin, GSrx750 ?. ................ Shortly before the decision was announced, Boeing's then-chief executive officer, Phil Condit, flew to London to make a last-minute plea to the British Cabinet along with BAe's then-chairman, Richard Evans ....to no avail. Boeing suffered an even more stunning setback on Feb. 29 when the U.S. Air Force awarded a refueling tanker contract (BusinessWeek.com, 2/29/08) worth more than $35 billion to EADS and its U.S. partner Northrop Grumman. -------------------- Voilà C'est dit tout simplement ! ------------------- ..................... Up Against the Hungry Newcomer Since 2001, Boeing and EADS have competed for tanker contracts in six countries outside the U.S. EADS has won four of those competitions—in Britain, Australia, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—for a total of 25 planes. Boeing has won in Japan and Italy, where it had deep political support thanks to key local contractors, for a total of eight. Il, suffit de rtehgarder les faits,.... lesd faits ! Pas les souhaits & avis infondés , dans un système de DPO ! ---------------------- Although each of these deals had unique elements, taken together they foreshadowed some of the difficulties Boeing now faces in the U.S. As a hungry newcomer, EADS was more willing to make concessions to win customers. For example, in Britain it agreed to assume much of the financial risk in building the planes, and then lease them to the government. Boeing, accustomed to traditional procurement contracts, never offered such an arrangement, consultant Beaver says. The U.S. aerospace giant had worked on other British military programs, notably the C-17 transport plane, "which was handled by a different part of Boeing and has been very successful because they understood the culture," Beaver says. But "the tanker people appeared not to understand the British market." Footing the Research Bill In geographically isolated Australia, which ordered five Airbus-based tankers, EADS marketers played up the plane's larger capacity. The Airbus plane can carry more fuel and fly longer distances than the Boeing model, while carrying cargo in its hold and fuel stored in the wings. The U.S. Air Force has said those factors figured in its decision as well—prompting complaints from Boeing (BusinessWeek.com, 3/7/08)..... Oui ! ......that it easily could have developed a bigger tanker based on its 777 passenger jet, if it had known the Air Force wanted that. Totalement faux, pour les raisons factuelles et analyses très circonstanciées, et irréfutables, que j'ai avancées ! Je connais mon dossier ! J'ai l'habitude des "International Tenders", et les règles et procédures ! Contrairement aux ignorants, qui balancent des allégations et insinuations, faute de connaisances et d'arguments cohérents ! ------------------ EADS also impressed potential customers by investing its own money to build and test a prototype of an innovative boom that will be used to transfer fuel between planes. Boeing, reinforcing its image as comfortable incumbent, carried out tests using an older boom design, and said it would build a next-generation boom only if it won the big U.S. contract. Arrogance et chantage ! Pas vraiment une combinaison "gagnante" ! Et surtout pas un esprit "gagnant -gagnant" ! Quel pantalonnade ! -------------------- Even Boeing's tanker victories in Japan and Italy have been tarnished. Japan received its first tanker in February, about a year late, and Italy's program is about two years behind schedule, with the first aircraft now expected for delivery in the next few months. Although some of the delay stems from modifications requested by the customers, Boeing has acknowledged technical problems as well. ----------------- Fleets of Orphan Tankers The delays have undercut Boeing's ability to present itself to the Air Force as a less-risky alternative to upstart EADS. "The perception has changed, and Boeing has lost some of its advantage," says Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with consultancy Teal Group in Fairfax, Va. What's more, if Boeing fails to overturn the Air Force decision, Japan and Italy will be stuck with orphan fleets of tankersthe only planes of their kind in the worldthat will cost far more to maintain than they would if Boeing had geared up to provide maintenance and parts for a big Air Force contract. Nous avions évoqué tout ceci, .... avnt Business Week ! C'est Business Week qui nous copie, ... bien sûr !  Alors, GSrx750, .....vous et les copains n'avez toujours pas compris ? Il n'y a pas que les avis que vous partagez avec dupont ! La lenteur d'esprit, aussi (comme avoué par dupont lui-même). --------------- The orphan-fleet scenario also is likely to scare away other potential tanker customers for Boeing, if it doesn't ultimately win the Air Force deal. Evidemment ! ----------------------- EADS, of course, still could face delays on its own contracts. Bien sûr ! ................ But for now, EADS' aggressive marketing and its willingness to go the extra mile for non-U.S. customers has strengthened its bid for one of the biggest defense-contract prizes to come along in years. Bien vu ! "Fair Point" Matlack is BusinessWeek's Paris bureau chief . (Message édité par sevrien le 12/03/2008 19h42) |
||
|
|
||
|
Beochien
Inscrit le 13/02/2007 |
# 12 mars 2008 21:30 | |
|
Bonsoir Le plus clair que j'ai trouvé, net et concis ... Pas sur que ce soit le texte de Boeing, mais cela pourrait y ressembler ! http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... eing01.htm Extrait : # Flaws in this procurement process resulted in a significant gap between the aircraft the Air Force originally set out to procure -- a medium-sized tanker to replace the KC-135, as stated in the RFP -- and the much larger Airbus A330-based tanker it ultimately selected. It is clear that frequent and often unstated changes during the course of the competition -- including manipulation of evaluation criteria and application of unstated and unsupported priorities among the key system requirements -- resulted in selection of an aircraft that was radically different from that sought by the Air Force and inferior to the Boeing 767 tanker offering. # Because of the way the Air Force treated Boeing's cost/price data, the company was effectively denied its right to compete with a commercial-derivative product, contrary not only to the RFP but also to federal statute and regulation. The Air Force refused to accept Boeing's Federal Acquisition Regulation-compliant cost/price information, developed over 50 years of building commercial aircraft, and instead treated the company's airframe cost/price information as if it were a military-defense product. Not only did this flawed decision deny the government the manufacturing benefits of Boeing's unique in-line production capability, subjecting the Air Force to higher risk, but it also resulted in a distortion of the price at which Boeing actually offered to produce tankers. Bon, c'est bien fait par des lawyers, reste à trouver entre véracité, ... et manipulations etc ... Statements Boeing assez délirants ... limite parano ... et totalement innacceptable si c'est faux ! si c'est faux discrédit durable, si c'est prouvé ... vrai PB pour l'USAF ! c'est terminator pour celui qui ment !!! Bon ... je ne sais pas ce que vaut le site! Mais bon sang si le texte est juste, il y à obligatoirement un mort au bout de l'enquête ! Pour les spécialistes !! JPRS Paris _________________ JPRS |
||
|
|
||
|
Beochien
Inscrit le 13/02/2007 |
# 12 mars 2008 21:45 | |
|
Bonsoir Le côté politique ... par le Seattle Pi http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/ ... est12.html Extraits ! ---------------------------------- Mettre Mc Cain dans le coup !! La bonne démarche si le démocrates gagnent, et ils tiennent +/- le congrés, du moins ils peuvent le bloquer !! Boeing: Tanker contest was 'seriously flawed' Word that McCain aides lobbied for EADS raises potential political angle By JAMES WALLACE P-I AEROSPACE REPORTER Boeing took off the gloves Tuesday against one of its best and oldest customers -- the United States Air Force. In formally protesting the Air Force's decision to award a tanker contract worth about $35 billion to a team that includes the parent of rival Airbus, The Boeing Co. said the competition was "seriously flawed." The Air Force has said that it simply picked the plane that better suited its needs. Meanwhile, The Associated Press reported Tuesday that aides to Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, lobbied last year on behalf of EADS. And Bloomberg News reported that the Loeffler Group, led by Tom Loeffler, now co-chairman of McCain's campaign, received $220,000 from EADS in 2007, according to congressional lobbying records. McCain said Tuesday that his only role in the tanker issue was to try to ensure fairness. --------------------------------- tous les coups sont permis ! Bientôt les contributions Boeing à la une ??? JPRS Paris _________________ JPRS |
||
|
|
||
|
sevrien
Inscrit le 08/08/2006 |
# 12 mars 2008 23:07 | |
|
Lien : http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny- ... 8939.story Texte : Editorial: Boeing should accept USAF decision March 12, 2008 Big corporations, and their patrons in Washington, mostly love globalization - unless it's their ox that's gored on the altar of free trade. Oui! Les grandes compagnies adorent la mondialisation, ... sauf quand elles perdent le match ! -------------- That's what's happening now with the aerospace giant Boeing Co. It's crying foul after losing out to Northrop Grumman Corp. and European aircraft manufacturer Airbus on a lucrative contract to build aircraft refueling tankers for the U.S. Air Force. Regarder Boeing ! --------------- But if international competition is a sound economic concept when you win - and it is - then it's a sound economic concept when you lose. Si le concept de la concurrence internationale est bon quand on gagne, il reste bon, aussi, quand on perd ! ----------- Members of Congress crying "Buy American," planning hearings and threatening to withhold funding for the $35 billion contract should cool their jets. Claiming that the job was awarded in a "seriously flawed" competition, Boeing said it filed a formal protest yesterday with the Government Accountability Office. The GAO has 100 days to review the Air Force's decision and determine whether to dismiss or uphold the protest. Congress should, at minimum, allow that administrative process to play out. Oui ! Bien sûr ---------------------- The St. Louis-based Boeing Integrated Defense Systems and Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman say that the tanker program will create 45,000 to 48,000 jobs. Northrop plans to convert Airbus passenger planes, which are built in France. But company officials said that tanker assembly, and the vast majority of the new jobs, will be in the United States. That's good, but what's important for the Air Force is getting the best planes at the best price. Voilà un point de vue difficile à contrer ! (Message édité par sevrien le 12/03/2008 23h09) |
||
|
|
||
Ajouter une réponse
Vous devez être inscrit et connecté sur AeroWeb pour pouvoir ajouter une réponse à ce sujet !
