© 2012 Brad Jackson. All rights reserved. a-29-alta

Back to the Blog The Bloody Business of Military Contracts

Play

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson and Ben Domenech are joined by George Landrith to discuss the controversy over the Hawker Beechcraft vs. Embraer Air Force contract, why there may have been foul play, and the messy world of defense contracts.

We’re brought to you as always by Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at bjackson[at]coffeeandmarkets.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Related Links:

What’s Going on with Air Force Supplier Contracts?
Rhetoric Heats up in Embraer vs. Beechcraft Contract Drama
Cessna parent remains interested in Hawker Beechcraft — for the right price

Play

Follow Brad on Twitter
Follow Ben on Twitter

Subscribe to The Transom

The hosts and guests of Coffee and Markets speak only for ourselves, not any clients or employers.

  • NormD

    Your guest presents a very biased opinion.  Your questions seemed ill-informed and softball.

    Snopes has some details on the light attack aircraft contract  http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/hawker.asp

    His comment that the Boeing KC-767 tanker is “better” than the Northup/Airbus KC-330 is questionable.  The KC-330 carried 20% more fuel, plus more cargo pallets (26 versus 19) and passengers.  The KC-767 is only “better” because it is smaller and fits existing logistics facilities, a requirement that was added after Boeing lost the first round of competition to insure that they would win the rematch.
    Our troops should have the very best equipment, even if we have to use foreign suppliers.  I want American companies to be the best suppliers, but why should they even try when they can rely on people like your guest to force the purchase of American equipment that is less-than-best.