If you read The Herald or Wall Street Journal or one of the Seattle newspapers this morning (but not the other) you already know about the Rand report on U.S. Air Force tankers. (For my story, click here: http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/01/27/100loc_a1tankers001.cfm )
The rest of the journalism world is playing catch up today.
This story in Congress Daily http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0106/012706cdam3.htm focuses on the fact that Rand didn’t find there’s a need to rush to buy new tankers. (Thanks to FOB Scott Hamilton for pointing it out.)
Key Quote: “With no compelling reason to replace the Air Force’s Boeing KC-135 tankers in the near future, the study concluded that the Air Force should weigh budget constraints and other considerations before purchasing new aircraft, said a government source.”
The Associated Press has a story http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5575602,00.html that focuses on the prospect of EADS getting to compete for tanker contracts (which caught the eye of Web editors at The Guardian in Manchester, England).
Key Quote: “The study appears to back a defense bill signed by President Bush that would allow open competition for the multibillion dollar tanker contract. … An earlier bill approved by the House would have barred the Pentagon from purchasing goods and services from foreign companies that receive government subsidies. While no companies were named, lawmakers said the amendment was aimed at disqualifying Airbus’s parent company from bidding on the tanker contract.”
Reuters’ report http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-01-27T205203Z_01_N277408_RTRUKOC_0_US-ARMS-TANKERS.xml&archived=False looks at both issues.
Key Quote: But the analysis, briefed to lawmakers’ aides on Thursday, found no pressing need to start the contest to replace the current fleet of about 530 KC-135 tankers, one congressional staffer said on Friday. … Instead, it established that a competition could be held without ‘rushing into it,’ said the staffer familiar with the briefing, who spoke on condition of anonymity.”
And here’s the report from the Mobile Register http://www.al.com/business/mobileregister/index.ssf?/base/business/1138292206230540.xml&coll=3, where EADS/Northrop would modify Airbus A330s if the consortium were to get a bid to build some.
Key Quote: “The Pentagon’s Irwin said a decision on whether to hold a competition could be made as early as March or could be delayed ‘for months or longer.’”
So there you have it.
Meanwhile, back on Monday, Flight International had an interesting report http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2006/01/23/Navigation/177/204192/Full+recovery.html on the state of the jet leasing business. What caught my eye was the strength in the market for leased 767s.
Flight says airlines don’t want to buy 767s, not with the 787 and A350 coming on line in the next half-dozen years, but they need mid-sized jets now, so they’re hot to get their hands on any ‘Six-Sevens leasing companies have available.
Key Quote: “In the widebody sector, the Boeing 767 is hot property. ‘There have been some real dogfights over the 767,’ says (Henry Hubschman, president of GECAS).”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.