Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
neilrich

Bae Close To Selling 20% Stake In Airbus

Recommended Posts

One of the positive points about British industry has to be our 20% stake in AIRBUS. Only it is now to be SOLD! How long before the British jobs go? As Airbus gradually transfer wing manufacturing and assembly from the UK to France, Germany and Eastern Europe. :angry:

BAE close to selling 20% stake in Airbus

I like Airbus, they will keep me employed for the next 40 years :-)

Edited by theChuz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is actually quite telling.

it smacks of which way us brits will bend if forced to decide between the US/EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is actually quite telling.

it smacks of which way us brits will bend if forced to decide between the US/EU.

US Defence Spending: $500b/year

Airbus Sales: $25b/year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This country originally owned over 40% of the nascent Airbus, which was then sold by Tony Benn for dogmatic anti-European reasons, we then had to buy back in at a much lower stake and at a much higher price; now we're dumping it!

I'm not surprised though, BAE have long denied the rumours so obviously it was true, they want to break into the US defense sector, which is huge, and the European lot seem preoccupied with finding ways of flogging missiles to China. At least it should help with issues surrounding technology transfer, expect the US to now allow British access to JSF software.

I like Airbus, they will keep me employed for the next 40 years :-)

Working on big birds with lots of thrust? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This country originally owned over 40% of the nascent Airbus, which was then sold by Tony Benn for dogmatic anti-European reasons, we then had to buy back in at a much lower stake and at a much higher price; now we're dumping it!

I'm not surprised though, BAE have long denied the rumours so obviously it was true, they want to break into the US defense sector, which is huge, and the European lot seem preoccupied with finding ways of flogging missiles to China. At least it should help with issues surrounding technology transfer, expect the US to now allow British access to JSF software.

quite a nice synopsis BB.

we also have a nice little outpost called fylingdales the US does not want europe to have,I think we got a deal on anti-missile stuff for that too a couple of years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least it should help with issues surrounding technology transfer, expect the US to now allow British access to JSF software. ;)

There is no way at the moment that the US want to give any of their military technology to any other country.

The ITAR or International Trade in Arms Regs in the US are astonishingly strict when it comes to tech transfer.

It will be a one way street, with the technology flowing from the UK to the US and not in the other direction! <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quite a nice synopsis BB.

we also have a nice little outpost called fylingdales the US does not want europe to have,I think we got a deal on anti-missile stuff for that too a couple of years ago.

Fylingdales is like a gloried golf course ( ;) ) compared to the fun that occurs at Boscombe Down.

There is no way at the moment that the US want to give any of their military technology to any other country.

The ITAR or International Trade in Arms Regs in the US are astonishingly strict when it comes to tech transfer.

Actually I can't blame them in a (paranoid 'they're all out to get us') way, there are plenty of EU directives floating about calling for the 'pooling' of defense technology, that's enough to spook the US when it comes to technology sharing. A large part of our JSF fleet will be stationed on the new class of aircraft carrier that's being developed with the French, and France along with others in the EU are looking at ways of flogging the self-same carriers to China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be a one way street, with the technology flowing from the UK to the US and not in the other direction! <_<

A bit like the gas turbine, the secrets of Miles aircraft which gave them supersonic capability, ditching the worrying TSR2 as it would show up the crap Phantom and F111..........

Time to cut loose of the US Goverment. The US people would be well advised to as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with ITAR is that the UK does not control our Defence Technology with such importance.

There is actually a backlash in the US about ITAR and defence companies are actually going out of business where they cannot trade with other countries.

Under ITAR a person within the US defence company has to be denoted to the US Gov to be personally liable for any breaches, this can lead to Jail Time!

And all to control ridiculous items of defence tech such as Nuts and Bolts! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit like the gas turbine, the secrets of Miles aircraft which gave them supersonic capability, ditching the worrying TSR2 as it would show up the crap Phantom and F111..........

Time to cut loose of the US Goverment. The US people would be well advised to as well.

There were over 5,000 'crap' Phantoms built that served 12 nations' air forces for over 40 years, beloved by all who flew it - including me. You don't need look any farther than exploding engines, malfunctioning main gear, broken-by-design electrical system and costs that were simply out of control for the cancellation of the TSR.2, The Avro Arrow on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit disconcerting is according to the Guardian all the moeny will buy is 2/3 of a US electronic luggage scanning/security company.

Nevermind: if you object you can always do your patriotic bit by buying EADs shares. But it probably helps if you've got a French bank account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit like the gas turbine, the secrets of Miles aircraft which gave them supersonic capability, ditching the worrying TSR2 as it would show up the crap Phantom and F111..........

Time to cut loose of the US Goverment. The US people would be well advised to as well.

The TSR2 cancellation was tied up with our IMF bailouts, it's best not to get the country into such vulnerable predicaments in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TSR2 cancellation was tied up with our IMF bailouts, it's best not to get the country into such vulnerable predicaments in the first place.

Hardly, the TSR.2 was cancelled in April 1965 but Denis Healey didn't go cap in hand to the IMF until March 1974. The TSR.2 was cancelled because it had very little prospect of being able to function to the required standard (GOR339) on any remotely feasible schedule or budget.

Edited by jackalope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly, the TSR.2 was cancelled in April 1965 but Denis Healey didn't go cap in hand to the IMF until March 1974.

That was the biggie, however there were others, £714m in August 1961, $3 billion in IMF and other credit late '64, the IMF bailed us out to the tune of $1.4 billion in 12 May 1965, the IMF got pissy with our budget in '67 and prepared a further $1.4 billion in stand-by credit. The $3.9 billion in 1974 was just one in a long line.

Edited by BuyingBear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were over 5,000 'crap' Phantoms built that served 12 nations' air forces for over 40 years, beloved by all who flew it - including me. You don't need look any farther than exploding engines, malfunctioning main gear, broken-by-design electrical system and costs that were simply out of control for the cancellation of the TSR.2, The Avro Arrow on the other hand...

It was a prototype after all with limited test program before it was closed. Until the American Govt forced Heally to scrap it and wipe all traces of its manufacturing process off the face of the UK asap so that it could never be reinstated......

Dick Rutan concurs that the Phantom was SHITE!! Good enough for me... It was a SHITE aeroplane. Period

Bee Beaumont thought the TSR2 was rather good. God enough for me.

Any very average shed like unarmed fast jet with two large engines must be loved by those who are paid to fly them. I'm sure I would have loved to fly the Phantom too. Would have loved to fly a Lightning or F16 even more. :D

Edited by Randall Herbert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the biggie, however there were others, £714m in August 1961, $3 billion in IMF and other credit late '64, the IMF bailed us out to the tune of $1.4 billion in 12 May 1965, the IMF got pissy with our budget in '67 and prepared a further $1.4 billion in stand-by credit. The $3.9 billion in 1974 was just one in a long line.

I stand corrected on that. But is there any evidence (beyond Grassy Knollington type conjecture) that the May 65 loan is linked to the TSR.2 cancellation? The only real export prospect for the TSR.2 (RAAF) had already been torpedoed by Mountbatten by that stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected on that. But is there any evidence (beyond Grassy Knollington type conjecture) that the May 65 loan is linked to the TSR.2 cancellation?

A mere coincidence I'm sure, much like the links between political loans and peerages ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dick Rutan concurs that the Phantom was SHITE!! Good enough for me... It was a SHITE aeroplane. Period

On what grounds do you say it was shite? It was an outstanding commercial success and was a very effective war fighting machine (post Rolling Thunder Vietnam, Yom Kippur, War of Attrition).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On what grounds do you say it was shite?

I'm sure it was a decent jet, however the spey engine in the UK version was a bit of a hack. The question is whether a British built alternative would have been better and whether the TSR2 would have left us with a degree independence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure it was a decent jet, however the spey engine in the UK version was a bit of a hack. The question is whether a British built alternative would have been better and whether the TSR2 would have left us with a degree independence.

The only British alternative was the Lightning which has the combat radius of a 10p coin and weapons system the use of which is best described as 'challenging'.

I just don't buy the theory that the nasty US forced us to cancel a world beating TSR.2. The facts do not support the conjecture. First, the US had no problem with buying other British aircraft of that period (B-57, AV-8) and second, ample grounds already existed for the cancellation TSR.2 without seeing the shadowy hand of the US Military Industrial complex at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only British alternative was the Lightning which has the combat radius of a 10p coin and weapons system the use of which is best described as 'challenging'.

I just don't buy the theory that the nasty US forced us to cancel a world beating TSR.2. The facts do not support the conjecture. First, the US had no problem with buying other British aircraft of that period (B-57, AV-8) and second, ample grounds already existed for the cancellation TSR.2 without seeing the shadowy hand of the US Military Industrial complex at work.

I agree with the comments about the Lightning (which was designed to meet a very narrow requirement), but I'm not so sure about the AV-8.

I thought the licensing set-up was because the US simply wouldn't allow a major weapon system to be foreign (I.e. UK) built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On what grounds do you say it was shite?

Wasn't it originally produced without a cannon, because 'no-one dogfights anymore'?

But I agree, from what I know of the Phantom and comparable aircraft of the time, once they fixed that embarassing blunder it seemed to do pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we also have a nice little outpost called fylingdales the US does not want europe to have,I think we got a deal on anti-missile stuff for that too a couple of years ago.

I believe that we received Trident missiles as a result of allowing them to stay there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.