EADS and BAE Systems in merger talks
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
Carrier......subs.....
Both of which are for Uk customer, as are the T45, future naval vessels, much of the air side, much of the land side (what's left of it), combat bits and pieces.
I could well be totally wrong but the mix seems very high. Irrelevant anyway really
Last edited:
Pretty much anything more technical than a boot in the DoD was supplied by BAe or a subsidiary.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 5,258
- Location
- Southampton
that gonna be one big mother of a company after that merge
and its E-a-d-s for gods sakes!
or BAEEADS soon - lets throw an 'r' in there to and call it 'beards'
and its E-a-d-s for gods sakes!
or BAEEADS soon - lets throw an 'r' in there to and call it 'beards'
Oh ok.
Excuse me but I've got to go now so I can tell all the EADS employees I've worked with that they're saying their company's name incorrectly.
It's ee-ads.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2010
- Posts
- 1,215
No it's proper name is to pronounce the letters individually. The employees you know are using that way of saying it as a colloquialism. Much like many people call the company SAP 'Sap' but in reality the official pronunciation is S A P. People who used to work for the Halifax called it 'H - Boss' (being Halifax Bank of Scotland) but nobody would ever say that was its correct name.
I used to work for DASA, and was there when it became EADS.
It's pronounced as individual letters because it's an acronym!
They bought up a lot of companies in the US like the company that makes the Bradley but most of their sales are probably for systems rather than complete vessels/planes etc - they are making the new gun for the new USN destroyers, they make the M777 Howitzer
They have a lot of security clearances over there which EADS do not have, its one of the main reasons the merger would be attractive from an EADS point of view. I reckon that's were they see the most synergies, as a foot in the door for a lot of EADS equipment they have had trouble winning contracts for in the US because they are not seen the same as BAe over there.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2010
- Posts
- 1,215
You mean Bay Systems.
Tell me no.
Weird how their on-line materials refer to it as e-a-d-s. I'm guessing your colleagues know more than EADS marketing department, though.
Last edited:
Who cares?
Its a part of the war industry, its not exactly high on my list of giving a damn.
However, considering the partner is a European firm with an agenda in Air power and perhaps space power eventually, it seems interesting in some respects.
I imagine that they may be partnering up to create the Taranis on a wider scale while cutting down on the costs (No doubt EADS has some nice contracts that BAE cannot get), which means that this low-level intelligence Aircraft may have a much larger effect on how our military's will work in the near future.
Its a part of the war industry, its not exactly high on my list of giving a damn.
However, considering the partner is a European firm with an agenda in Air power and perhaps space power eventually, it seems interesting in some respects.
I imagine that they may be partnering up to create the Taranis on a wider scale while cutting down on the costs (No doubt EADS has some nice contracts that BAE cannot get), which means that this low-level intelligence Aircraft may have a much larger effect on how our military's will work in the near future.