Round 3 in the annual budget boxing match between C-17 Defenders and those who want to stop production, the Challengers, ended with a stinging left hook to the jaw of the Defenders. In this match up, the Challengers are the Obama Administration, who wants to end production funds for Boeing’s C-17 Globemaster III advanced airlifter, which is assembled in Long Beach by about 5,000 skilled workers. The Defenders are just about everybody else in Washington DC, who wants to continue paying for more of the heavy airlifters.
Last week, in testimony before the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said "I am fully aware of the political pressure to continue building the C-17 and proceed with an alternate engine for the F-35. So let me be very clear: I will strongly recommend that the president veto any legislation that sustains the unnecessary continuation of these two programs."
Given the recent history of the C-17 matchup, this is indeed a stinging jab to the Defenders. During last year’s budget process, Gates also called for an end to C-17 production, along with a short list of other programs he wanted to kill. But, last year, the hardest battle was fought over the F-22 fighter. Then, Gates made his budget-saving-veto-threat over the F-22, and despite intense lobbying and strong congressional resistance, he eventually won that matchup and production was ended.
Gates did not support last year’s call to end C-17 production with any talk of veto threat, and the result was a fiscal 2010 defense budget which provided for 10 more planes. The clear message from last year was that in order to end a large program—one that employs thousands of registered voters spread across dozens of congressional districts, the only way for the Obama Administration to win, is to threaten a presidential veto of the defense budget bill if it includes funds for the programs targeted for elimination.
That’s what they did last year for the F-22, and now it is what they are doing this year for the C-17. Boeing is taking this year’s matchup pretty seriously. While the company continues to fish for international orders, and a 10 plane order from India is still expected, the company has slowed the rate of production for the C-17s.
Boeing is also eyeing a very lucrative contract to build new air refueling tankers for the Air Force. But, the tanker design is based on a 767 platform and it doesn’t seem likely that much action under this contract would come to the company’s Long Beach plant. Initially, Boeing was expecting to compete against a joint proposal from European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) and Northrop Grumman for the tanker contract, but Northrop recently withdrew. Subsequently, EADS requested more time to submit a proposal without Northrop. Late last week, the Defense Department had not yet decided if they would approve the request for more time.
As the Europeans were claiming protectionism on the tanker deal, they also announced they plan to market their new turboprop advanced freighter in the US. A deal earlier this month between EADS, through its Airbus subsidiary and the seven sponsoring European countries, Saved the over budget and behind schedule A400M military transport plane from the trash heap.
Now, Airbus says they are looking to sell about 200 of their plane in the U.S. Of course, the plane has a few disadvantages when compared with the C-17. Boeing spokesman Jerry Drelling told www.OC180NEWS.com “Four C-17s can carry the same load of eight A400Ms over the same range. The A400M is 48-percent more expensive to buy and 28-percent more expensive to operate.”
Not only that, the C-17 is actually flying missions and is in production, neither of which can be claimed by the Airbus plane. In fact, Airbus is not expected to start deliveries on the launch 184 plane order until 2013. The first deliveries were supposed to be flying in 2009.
