Print
Email
Share

Boeing still has to work for tanker contract after Northrop drops out

by GLENN FARLEY / KING 5 News, KING5.com and Associated Press

KING5.com

Posted on March 8, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Updated Monday, Mar 8 at 5:31 PM

SEATTLE - Northrop Grumman Corp. says it won't compete against Boeing Co. for a $35 billion contract to build refueling tankers for the Air Force because it doesn't think it can win, perhaps leaving Boeing as the sole bidder on the contract.

But Reuters, citing sources close to the situation, reports that EADS, the European parent of Airbus, may be mulling over whether to post its own bid. A partnership of Northrop Grumman and EADS won the tanker contract in 2008 before Boeing successfully protested.

Northrop's chief executive officer and president, Wes Bush, said Monday that the Pentagon guidelines for the program favor Boeing's smaller refueling tanker.

"After a comprehensive analysis of the final RFP, Northrop Grumman has determined that it will not submit a bid to the Department of Defense for the KC-X program," said Bush. "We reached this conclusion based on the structure of the source selection methodology defined in the RFP, which clearly favors Boeing’s smaller refueling tanker and does not provide adequate value recognition of the added capability of a larger tanker, precluding us from any competitive opportunity."

Last week, Boeing announced it would use the 767 as a model for the fleet of 179 refueling tankers, which will replace the 50-year-old KC-135 tankers.  Northrop's tanker , based on the Airbus 330 airframe has been ordered by several allied Air Forces, but is much larger.

In Everett, where the tankers will likely be built, members of the Machinists Union are understandably thrilled.

"Everybody in the plant is pretty much happy about it. There's a lot of optimism now," said machinist Mike Baker.

EADS could make its own bid for the tanker contract, but the public relations battle has been fought for years over the amount of American content in the respective planes. For example, the fuselage panels for the 767 are built in Japan, but the plane is assembled in Everett, mostly from U.S. parts. In the original competition, Northrop promised to assemble its tankers in Alabama with most of its major parts built in France and Germany. But now that Northrop is out of it, the question is whether it's realistic for EADS to win to against a backdrop of an economy struggling to create jobs.

But it's not a slam dunk for Boeing. The company still needs to meet requirements laid out by the Air Force.

"For some people who want to worry about 'will there be a competition?' We had a competition, so we know exactly what Boeing's numbers are here and so the taxpayers aren't going to be hurt in any way and the Air Force and the Defense Department can negotiate with Boeing on price," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash.

The Obama administration had said such sole-source contracts aren't a good deal for the taxpayer. But industry insiders say there's no other company poised to meet the Air Force's guidelines for the program.

The refueling tanker contract has been delayed numerous times. Boeing initially won it several years ago, but the contract was cancelled after it was learned that a former Air Force official who later served as a top Boeing executive conspired to help the company win. Darlene Druyan pleaded guilty to conspiracy in 2004 and was fired by Boeing.

A new round of bidding was ordered.

In Feb. 2008, Boeing lost the contract to EADS and Northrop Grumman. Boeing protested, saying the Pentagon selected a larger plane than it originally asked for. Washington state lawmakers also blasted the Pentagon for awarding the contract to send work overseas.

Several months later, the contract was put back up for bid after the Government Accountability Office backed Boeing's protest.

It was speculated that the combined forces of Northrop Grumman would pull out of the competition after it appeared that The Pentagon's latest requirements favored Boeing's 767 over the larger Airbus A330. Northrop could have protested the Request For Proposals issued last month to restart the bidding, but Northrop says it won't protest.

Print
Email
Share

To add a comment, please register or login.

1000 characters remaining

Submit

We welcome your comments on this story's topic. Off-topic comments, personal attacks, and inappropriate language may be flagged and removed, and comment privileges blocked, per our Terms of Service. Thanks for keeping the comments space respectful.

Privacy Policy

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Comments: Displaying 1 - 11 of 11

speedracer said on March 9, 2010 at 6:53 AM

was there not just a huge waste of money on an investigation why Boieng did not get the contract?Now all the sudden they drop out and it looks like Boieng will get it.What another waste of money....stupido...

38920513
Flag this comment

lundgren said on March 8, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Hey, Pantagon, have Toyota build the tankers.

38904936
Flag this comment

collegeguy said on March 8, 2010 at 5:24 PM

yessir is correct that outsourcing is not required for survival of a company. And not always is outsourcing actually cheaper. In some cases, the real problem is initial capital to produce a product can be so great that a company can't afford to make it themselves. I worked for a company that actually brought work back into the plant that had been outsourced to other companies once they purchased new equipment capable of doing the work. It cut cost on the product per piece from a dollar down to fifty cents. Granted the million dollars spent on the new machine initially hurts but in the end, it is cheaper.

38896173
Flag this comment

yessir said on March 8, 2010 at 4:50 PM

Businesses don't just outsource to "survive".... Boeing was doing quite well when it began its outsourcing campaign back in the 80's. It wasn't about survival... it was about increasing profit. Ironically they've hurt themselves in the process. You get what you pay for, and that often includes your work force. Anyone buy any lead infused toys from China lately?

38894538
Flag this comment

rnl52 said on March 8, 2010 at 4:42 PM

Opps....I mean Boeing.

38894161
Flag this comment

rnl52 said on March 8, 2010 at 4:37 PM

shorline, I agree that labor costs are certainly higher here, But median family income has only risen 13.2% since 1995 (IRS figures), while our financial markets have been putting relentless pressures on companys to provide double digit profits every quarter. I would rather see monies spent for goods going to more gains on median family income, and less going to profit expectations. The nearly flat gains made by the working class over the past few years drive the demand for cheaper goods, and it becomes a race to the bottom. At least we agree that Boing has to get this contract.

38893932
Flag this comment

graham said on March 8, 2010 at 3:07 PM

why should us tax payers buy anything from AirBus

38890163
Flag this comment

shoreline said on March 8, 2010 at 2:45 PM

I totally agree with the tankers being built in the US. Go Boeing! The Levi's analogy used by rnl52 above left out one important number. If a pair of Levi's were produced in the United States today, the cost would be a lot more than $38.00. As long as American Consumers give first priority to cheap prices, the US will NEVER be able to compete with foriegn labor. It's not all about greedy CEO's. Labor and associated domestic costs are higher in the US, period. Those costs get passed along to consumers. Businesses go to outsourcing labor in order to survive.

38889148
Flag this comment

rnl52 said on March 8, 2010 at 12:37 PM

We do not need to funnel any more of our taxpayer dollars overseas, especially for national security purposes? When will we learn that outsourcing our jobs has very little benefit on prices and great detriment to our standard of living. The Levis I buy used to be made here in the US and cost about $38.00 while providing American jobs. The Levis I buy now are made in Mexico and cost about $38.00, providing our citizens with no jobs. The biggest difference is the amount of profit going into CEO's bonus checks.

38882092
Flag this comment

bobknows said on March 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM

A foreign built tanker plane is NOT beneficial to the US military or the people who have to pay for it. If Northrup-Grumman can't build the plane in the US, they should not bid a foreign built plane.

38878964
Flag this comment

jtprince said on March 8, 2010 at 11:43 AM

It is a matter of national security for our nation to purchase its military equipment from domestic sources. It only makes sense to purchase an aircraft that is already in production in factories that are already producing product. If you don't understand preproduction costs and delays, go look at the Joint Strike Fighter program and its escalating costs and delays in development. The K767 is the right choice for our forces.

38878937
Flag this comment

Forgot Password?

Don't have an account?

Register Now

Member Benefits

Link your account to your Twitter or Facebook account for easier login!

Link your account to your Facebook profile Link your account to your Twitter profile

Check box to receive Free Special Offers

* - Indicates required field

Check box to receive Free Special Offers

Connecting to

You may need to allow pop up window for this step of registration

Just one more step:

Please take a moment to review the available e-mail newsletters has to offer. Place a checkbox next to the newsletters you wish to subscribe to.

Welcome.

Thank you for becoming a member of KING5.com. You now have full access to the best local coverage and late breaking news from KING5.com. Soon you will be redirected to the page you were seeking, and a confirmation email will be delivered to you.

You will need to respond to the confirmation e-mail for your account to be activated.

KING5.com is dedicated to bringing you exceptional news and outstanding information services, all while personalizing it to your liking. We're sure you'll enjoy being a KING5.com member! If you need assistance, please contact us.