Italy Cancels Boeing Pegasus Order, Shifting to Airbus A330 MRTT
91 points by embedding-shape 3 hours ago | 20 comments

tcgv 2 hours ago
> Several defence analysts point out that although the KC-46 is the standard tanker of the USAF, it has suffered technical problems and delays that have slowed its competitiveness abroad, to the benefit of the A330 MRTT, which has already been adopted by many NATO and non-NATO allies. In this sense, the Italian choice is seen more as an industrial victory for Airbus than as an American “political defeat”.

The political factor surely played a role here, but this bit at the end of the article also sheds light on Boeing's decline, which predates the current US administration.

While politics acted as a catalyst, Boeing was ultimately defeated by its own undoing.

reply
dylan604 34 minutes ago
Having doors flying off one of your planes and engine failure causing part of the cowling to bust a window and sucking a passenger out of another is definitely not a bit of politics. Nevermind the bullshit 737Max nonsense. At this point, I'd imagine any Boeing orders left are only in place because Airbus can't keep up. Politics didn't need to come within 10 miles of this decision. It's just the free cherry on top.
reply
rootsudo 16 minutes ago
No, majority of Boeing orders to foreign countries use USA backed loans or is a significant part of pushing US interests in the world.

The message here, and it’s granted if you’re not aviation, finance or political aware is Italy keeping their aviation sector EU based being In the EU themselves and most likely getting tremendously better financing.

While the Boeing incidents you mentioned are unfortunate and a true consequence of engineering culture eroding at Boeing, it does not dispel the true safety of aviation in general nor the high success of the 737 Max.

reply
Retric 16 minutes ago
Incidents that are over five years old have minimal impact in terms of current competition between Boing and Airbus.

The airbus A320 family is associated with 1,490 fatalities, there’s just a vast number of flights daily so tiny risks add up. Companies buying new aircraft care far more about maintenance to fuel efficiency than a few rare incidents due to already corrected issues.

reply
harmmonica 5 minutes ago
Can you shed a bit more light on this? I can't find any evidence that there are that many fatalities related to that plane, at least related to its operations in flight. Seems like there are few or if my quick look shows even zero fatalities related to it flying. You wrote "associated" but can you define what you mean by that? During manufacturing, maintenance and other non-flight-related incidents?
reply
ceejayoz 7 minutes ago
> The airbus A380 family is associated with 1,490 fatalities…

What? The A380 has never had a single fatality or even injuries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A380#Accidents_and_inci...

> Incidents are over five years old have minimal impact in terms of current competition between Boing and Airbus.

Airbus (and Boeing) has a decade-long backlog. They absolutely do. https://flightplan.forecastinternational.com/2026/04/14/airb...

reply
Retric 4 minutes ago
reply
sschueller 2 hours ago
Meanwhile Switzerland is being taken to the cleaners. F35s that had a fix cost in contract with Lockheed are no longer fixed cost because the US says so.

Patriot systen permanently delayed and price going up and up. Stop payment resulted in the US pulling from the pre payment for the F35s...

reply
Quarrel 51 minutes ago
> Stop payment resulted in the US pulling from the pre payment for the F35s...

Which Switzerland then reluctantly agreed was allowed under the terms.

As you say, totally being taken to the cleaners, and it is unclear how they escape in the short term.

The more this happens though, the more deals like Italy's make senese, irrespective of the performance comparison of the two planes.

If the US is going to be an unreliable partner, that will filter through in many many ways, and the US can hardly blame anyone but themselves (well, I'm sure some fingers will get pointed internally).

reply
tokai 47 minutes ago
I don't understand why US weapons manufactures are not lobbying harder. They are losing the European market just as the largest rearmament since ww2 happens.

Maybe they are and its just a lost cause with the US administration.

reply
helsinkiandrew 20 minutes ago
> I don't understand why US weapons manufactures are not lobbying harder

It doesn’t really matter if your product is better or cheaper, if the customer thinks that service and spare parts might possibly be withdrawn in the future for political (or whatever) reasons they won’t buy your product.

reply
tokai 17 minutes ago
That is what they need the political lobbying for. Obviously not to help their pricing.
reply
shimman 8 minutes ago
So they need lobbying to lie to customers? Why would that help people choose Boeing when it ultimately is up the whims of one single individual that can drastically change moods every four years?

There is a reason why imperialism ultimately always fails.

reply
SecretDreams 40 minutes ago
They're very scared of their boss and the CEOs are short sighted by virtue of their compensation packages.
reply
kevin_thibedeau 2 hours ago
The USAF also selected the MRTT but corruption took care of that threat to Boeing.
reply
jsrozner 34 minutes ago
Gotta say, the headers in this article look AI-ish. It's getting harder and harder to tell, though.
reply
Maxion 31 minutes ago
The text looks AI generated as well.
reply
ungreased0675 2 hours ago
Italy probably didn’t want to wait 12 years for delivery. Good choice.
reply
netsharc 36 minutes ago
They probably also didn't want a President Vance, Rubio, Junior or Ivanka, to use the availability of parts and tech support as a way to ensure their compliance..
reply
zulux 2 hours ago
Good? A bit of competition is good for everybody. Having one vendor for everything leads to many problems.
reply
sltr 40 minutes ago
[dead]
reply