SkiDork wrote:I don't have time to wade through that entire document but...
Don't people realize in this day and age that there is no longer any such thing as a corporation that is not global? Does anyone think that Boeing is not using overseas suppliers on some of their parts? I'd be willing to place a wager that even Sikorski gets some of their parts from suppliers that are distributing profits internationally.
its true, but in politics its the image that counts. If I were prez, even if it wasn't necessarily the best or cheapest, I would buy american. We're paying his salary, the least one can do is kick a bit back.
Lockheed IS an American company.
There aren't many companies that get EVERYTHING built from within the US. Do you think those Secret Service chevy suburbans are 100% american? They're not...parts are built else where and assembled in the US, the same goes with ford, jeep, etc. So for all purposes...lockheed is a US company...regardless who "is on their team" or where "some parts are being made"
Bubba wrote:Hey RustyK...how about full disclosure on why you feel the way you do?
This political side of the board is new to me. Sorry for lateness.
I think it mostly stinks because Sikorsky has supported the president for 40 years. Bell and lockheed teamed up with the EH-101 in order to reep profits. They never would have gotten in without an american partner.
Sikorsky will maintain the current fleet for another 10-12 years until the new planes are ready. It was like loosing the superbowl though.
If I could type faster I would say more, but I'll have to talk it over beer the next time I am up...
RustyK wrote:
I think it mostly stinks because Sikorsky has supported the president for 40 years. Bell and lockheed teamed up with the EH-101 in order to reep profits. They never would have gotten in without an american partner.
So, Sikorsky wanted to lose money and not make a profit?
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"
Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
RustyK wrote:
I think it mostly stinks because Sikorsky has supported the president for 40 years. Bell and lockheed teamed up with the EH-101 in order to reep profits. They never would have gotten in without an american partner.
So, Sikorsky wanted to lose money and not make a profit?
Your right. They do not make much money on this contract.
But, since this helicopter is the most recognized in the world, you tend to sell more resonable facsimilies.
RustyK wrote:
I think it mostly stinks because Sikorsky has supported the president for 40 years. Bell and lockheed teamed up with the EH-101 in order to reep profits. They never would have gotten in without an american partner.
So, Sikorsky wanted to lose money and not make a profit?
Your right. They do not make much money on this contract.
But, since this helicopter is the most recognized in the world, you tend to sell more resonable facsimilies.
I don't get half of what you're talking about. I read on the main homepage off cnnmoney that lockheed (an american company) was awarded with the contract.....
President's helicopter gives British jobs a lift
[Financial Mail on Sunday, London. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. For]
Financial Mail on Sunday via NewsEdge Corporation : Jan. 30--Hundreds of jobs will be safeguarded in Britain following the award of a $1.7 billion (900 million) contract to supply helicopters for the US Presidential flight.
In a contract for 23 helicopters, America opted to buy the AgustaWestland-designed US101 for Marine One, as the Presidential flight is known. The US 101 is a variant of the British designed EH101, which is already in service with the Royal Navy.
Though the bulk of the helicopter will be built in the United States by lead contractor Lockheed Martin, and AgustaWestland is now owned by FinnMeccanica of Italy, some key components -- including rotorblades and transmission -- will be made at the AgustaWestland site at Yeovil, Somerset.
The helicopter was chosen in preference to the Sikorsky S92, which is still in development.
Winning the presidential order will also put the team in pole position for the much larger contract to supply 200 helicopters to the US Air Force for use as combat search-and-rescue craft. The EH101 design features three engines, has been in active service for a decade and is serving in the Arctic, the desert and has seen use in combat zones, including Bosnia and Iraq.
Tony Blair gave the US101 bid his personal backing by lobbying for the helicopter during private meetings with George W. Bush.
Rusty, can you say without question that all parts for Sikorsky choppers are manufactured in the US? If not, then your argument falls apart. I'm talking about everything, even the ash trays etc.
RustyK wrote:
I think it mostly stinks because Sikorsky has supported the president for 40 years. Bell and lockheed teamed up with the EH-101 in order to reep profits. They never would have gotten in without an american partner.
So, Sikorsky wanted to lose money and not make a profit?
Your right. They do not make much money on this contract.
But, since this helicopter is the most recognized in the world, you tend to sell more resonable facsimilies.
Assuming Sikorsky is still planning to use the Sea King, that's a naval chopper. There probably isn't a whole hell of alot of call for a military chopper refitted as executive transport.
According to one article I read, Lockheed's winning means a new finishing plant and 750 jobs in Oswego NY. Hardly seems like the US taxpayer is losing on the deal.
What is not possible is not to choose. ~Jean-Paul Sartre
RustyK wrote:
I think it mostly stinks because Sikorsky has supported the president for 40 years. Bell and lockheed teamed up with the EH-101 in order to reep profits. They never would have gotten in without an american partner.
So, Sikorsky wanted to lose money and not make a profit?
Hey, we don't manufacture large items to make money on the sale. We make the money on the parts and contracts that go with it. Jet Engines and Power Plants are a prime example of this. We give you 4 engines at cost. You buy one at 10% over. Spare parts are up 50% or more, and service is WAY up there, especially now that we track them on a computer during flight.
So, you basically give away the chopper, then screw 'em on parts and maintenance.
