EADS Sends Letter to Mobile Mayor About Possible Tanker Bid

Exactly midwest guy. Now Airbus can dictate the terms to Mobile if any work will be done there.

If others built all the sections for a house and I just nailed the sections together say. Would I be building the house? Or would I just be nailing the finished sections together?

They have airplanes that fly to alabama? I mean little own for alabama to even consider to try and snap the finished parts from airbus together.

Hey Fantastical...Check your facts first, Google NAFTA. The NAFTA negotiations were initiated under Papa Bush. Both Richard Shelby, a Democrat at the time and Howell Heflin, also a Democratic voted nay. Sonny Callahan voted aye. You might also check the roll call votes. Even though the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate, it was the Republican votes that passed the act. While you're at it Google NAFTA Superhighway.

midwestguy..Nothing in your comment "corrected " me or disputed what I typed. Maybe that's why you didn't know where to start. I used the 787 Dreamliner as an example and the Boeing 767 plane that would be used as a Refueling Tanker would use some of the same foreign components as the Dreamliner. The initial contract was canceled due to corruption on the part of a Boeing Executive and an Air Force Procurement Officer. The bidding process was slanted to favor Boeing and Boeing has had many issues with their attempts at delivering planes that were ordered by many countries. Boeing uses a lot of foreign components to save on cost and construction of their planes, not to compete with other plane contents and Airbus. Boeing is already losing a lot of market share of the global aerospace industry to EADS/Airbus and if they lose the Tanker Contract this would only increase their losses to other aerospace companies worldwide. The 787 Dreamliner delivery has been delayed for years and so would the new Tanker Refueling planes by Boeing if they get the new contract. midwestguy..Nothing you typed is new information and has no substance to substantiate that Boeing can build a cheaper and better plane for the USAF. Politics have become the determining factor in who gets the contract.

Wow.... I hardly know where to start correcting FANTASICAL..... First, the Boeing 787 dreamliner has nothing to do with this argument, as it's not the basis for their air tankers, and IS designed primarily for sale in the European market... The 787 is designed primarily as a competitor to the mid-size planes produced by aerospacial (AirBus).... Because of that, it uses a lot of European content. The Tanker Boeing is proposing would be a purpose-built plane (designed from the ground up as a tanker), and would be similar in many ways to a 757 or 767. There would be parts from a variety of suppliers, and yes some are from other countries, but it would be primarily an American plane. The EADS/Northrup proposal would have EADS (a Belgian company) buying Passenger Planes from AirBus (French), and working with Northrup-Grumman to modify them.... Now that Northrup-Grumman has bowed out, it's unlikely that EADS would ever use Mobile, AL in any way... They are much more likely to "remodel" the planes in Belgium. Luckily for Air Force Pilots, the contract almost certainly will go to Boeing, a company that employs skilled people to build a quality airplane. They've been doing so since 1937...... Boeing invented the whole concept of mid-air refueling, while AirBus/EADS/Northrup-Grumman has NEVER built an air tanker for this purpose. I sure wouldn't want my son or daughter to trust their life to a plane Alabamaniacs had screwed up with their 1950's era (3rd grade) ejucashin...

Here2Long... You are aware that the DEMOCRATS (Lawmakers) held the majority in both the Senate and House for the 6 years preceeding the signing of NAFTA? You are also aware that NAFTA was signed and made an agreement in 1994, two years after Bill Clinton became the POTUS? Sure you knew this, that's why you decided to blame the REPUBLICANS for the NAFTA Agreement? Of course that's what the Democrats are good at, blaming anyone and everyone for THEIR mistakes they made.

What's the difference between Boeing and Ford? Built in America really means assembled in America. You can thank the conservative Republicans for NAFTA and GATT!

midwestguy types.."Meanwhile, Boeing's Tanker would be built in the USA... with American parts," Hey smart guy, Google the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and read about how many foreign parts and components make up the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. There is about 20 different foreign countries supplying parts for the BOEING 787 DREAMLINER. Do you actually think that they will not buy these same parts from the same foreign companies for the Refueling Tanker?... midwesyguy you aren't too bright if you don't know that BOEING outsources most of their parts and suppliers for their "AMERICAN MADE PLANES".

First of all... nobody was EVER going to "build" tankers in Mobile.... EADS (a Belgian company) was going to buy planes from Airbus ( a French company).and pay Northrup-Grumman to modify them.... Mobile was one of 3 locations NG was thinking about using, so at best, Mobile had a 33% chance..... of modifying French airplanes Now IF EADS resubmits their bid, it's almost impossible that any work would be done in Mobile, as EADS is far more likely to do all the work in Belgium or France ..... Meanwhile, Boeing's Tanker would be built in the USA... with American parts, assembled by American workers. Remember when Conservative Republicans kept saying "Made in the USA"..... ?? Well, the Boeing plane would be, and the Airbus/EADS/Northrup-Grumman would not.... Boeing built EVERY tanker in the American fleet Airbus/EADS/ Northrup-Grumman has NEVER built an aerial refueling tanker before..... This seems like a no-brainer...... Boeing, Boeing, Boeing !!!!