US Aerospace Inc (CE) (USAE) News

Hello David Duquette CEO Looking into USAE as A SPAC company so a company can be placed in USAE via reverse merger

where did you get that from?

Hello today 8-2 2019 David Duquette has reinstated U S Aerospace INC
As CEO it is my intention to actively investigate potential companies to be part of the new U S Aerospace Company.News will follow shortly.

+400% today


USAE


I noticed because I have shares in one of my accts


lol

lol.....well, they paid their TA supposedly.......





z

Seems to be a slow roll out

spread the word joe

Sounds like a well thought out business plan. Go USAE

Hello today 8-2 2019 David Duquette has reinstated U S Aerospace INC
As CEO it is my intention to actively investigate potential companies to be part of the new U S Aerospace Company.News will follow shortly.

Did this ever settle? I submitted but haven't seen anything yet

Did USAE exist and publicly trade prior to their merge or acquiring of NCNC?

yes it does ncnc changed to usae

does that include NCNC which became USAE on 04/27/2010?

USAE A lawsuit was settled after 6 yrs which will pay shareholders of record owning shares on mar 31 2010 a payment of .07 per share.

USAE: Suspended by SEC

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/suspensions/2014/34-71465.pdf

USAE is getting attention and momentum

DO you know why???

USAE is gaining massive attension and momentum

it would be nice to see some more info about this company.

Is Precision Aerostructures still a subsidiary? Doin' DD - looks like they merged with New Century in '09. Any help?

http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/100122/NEW-CENTURY-COMPANIES-INC_8-K.A/

Still holding my shares in USAE but the company needs to make an update to tell investors what projects they are currently working on and/or towards at this time. One positive development of note right now is that the company website was down for a while but has now been restored.

U.S. Aerospace, Inc. (USAE)
Link: http://www.usaerospace.com/

ANYBODY?!?!?

Looking at picking up a few here any body want to give me there opinion on this company and stock position. Who all is long in this one?

I see that Avic has finally gotten their AC311 light utility helicopter off and running. I beleive this is something that AVIC could market through USAE without the need for a major DOD contract. The AC313 development has also grown to play a more vital civillian role in SAR, Fire, and Medical transport. USAE may have a chance to fill some civilian contracts if they don't focus on one particular objective (DOD). The later being slighted. Still their website is back online in anticipation of US government RFPs that may be announced soon if the DC pulpit can get its act together on the debt ceiling. I beleive we will resolve the debt ceiling issue.

I see that they sold the nine cancelled Marine One Copters to Canada for pennies on the dollar. Canada wanted them for parts for their New Comorant Rescue Copters. What? They can't get parts for their new birds. Anyhow Boeing has offered up their V22 Osprey to carry the Presidents cargo. Still I wouldn't put the President on a V22. Its signature is immense and a well placed IGLA would be catastophic. A tricked out Black Hawk would be a total disaster. It barely worked out for Seal Team Six. AVIC has a sweet air frame and for the base costs it could be tricked out nicely in the US. Still I would rather see Augusta get the contract before Sikorsky or Boeing. Were just lucky the terrorists spent all of their money on RPGs. Its only a matter of time before China files a complaint with the WTO. I'm starting to lose patience for this company as it has failed to produce any meaningful contracts in the year that I have owned it. AVIC has shown little to no interest in supporting it. The new CEO hasn't made one statement in almost a year, and his contract is almost up. I'm sure his age and his recent injuries will have incompacited his abilities at this point. The odds have fallen below the 1000 to one payout on a progressive slot at the Mirage.
I also suspect the recent government attacks directed at this companys joint venture with the Chinese will only escalate. It is at this point a bare minumum contract for parts would be an epic chore. Still the fat lady will not get her chance until the Senate votes, and if they vote negatively... I will still hold out as it will benefit all aerospace contractors in the end through protectionism.

It's nothing new to the US defense logistics department in getting bad parts. The US had problems with its own industry supplying parts during World War II. A 75 percent failure rate in parts and massive corruption stifled efforts in the early stages of the war. One of the reasons Truman became VP to Roosevelt. The US GAO is accusing China of producing faulty and counterfeit parts and supplying them to the DOD. Inspectors have been barred from receiving visas to inspect. China is blocking the inspectors in an effort to clean house. The US wants better mechanisms in place if it is to continue allowing the Chinese to bid on US defense contracts. http://onceuponaparadigm.wordpress.com/2011/06/19/a-pig-in-a-poke/ Like I said before it may be a boon to USAE if contracts are blocked. However it will eliminate any competetive bidding from AVIC on the TX, VXX, and CSAR. AVIC has validated its agreement into 2015 with USAE since a rouge source said it wasn't a valid contract. The political agenda is worrisome and I expect a whole lot of complaints at the WTO. If Chinese contracts are blocked costs will skyrocket for Major Aerospace projects currently in the works to finish production. The senate should understand the current bill before it makes a vote. IE all Chinese companies are government controlled.

House passes vote to block Chinese government controlled companies from bidding on US defense contracts. News Flash! 'All Chinese companies are government backed and controlled.
The measure has not passed in the Senate. Still a measure to block China could be a boon for USAE manufacturing.
http://www.globalpost.com/webblog/business-tech/us-free-trade-lies-prc-pentagon-bids-edition
It will however kill any chance for a VXX, TX, or CSAR competition for AVIC if a senate vote passes and the President signs off on it.

USAE has changed it website if they didn't sell it out right.
I imagine to generate ad revs. http://www.usaerospace.com/
Still no news

Glad to see you are still on top of developments that could be positive for USAE. We appreciate your posts on this board.

The Navy is seeking two VXX variants for the marine one replacement. Recently I heard Internet articles that are so important in informing investors on the boards will become copyrighted material. We will not be able to post information from articles or links relevant to our stock.
Until then here is the latest on the VXX program or Marine One Contract. If you subscribe to Defense Industry Daily you can read the links attached in this article.
June 2, 2011 Another round of competition is on the way, and the Pentagon wants to buy 2 different helicopters in the VXX follow-on program.
defenseindustrydaily.com/lockheedmartin-us101-wins-presidential-helicopter-contract-064/#vxx-program.
I'm reluctant to post do to the liabilities possibly associated with copyrighted materials. I'm also interested to know if USAE is involved with the latest NEI contracts with Canada. The NEI is supposed to be announcing the contract winners very soon. USAE's stock has all but stopped trading making me think news is going to break soon. Good or bad.

The Air Force has proposed a meager 16 million dollar budget for the T-X program in 2012. The KAI T-50 will have to cut production costs by 7 million dollars to meet the challenge for an off the shelf product. The costs for an L-15 Hongdu via USAE is about 16.7 million. All available aircraft are joint ventures with foreign entities. This includes BAE, KAI, AVIC and Alenia Aermacchi. More than likely Lockheed has the advantage even though the L-15 is a far superior twin engine design for about 7 million dollars less than the T-50. Still the L-15 may actually make it into the contest considering the T-50 program was subsidized by the Korean government to the tune of 70% funding. In this particular case not one design is at the drawing board and available by a sole US player. It is apparent that UAV's will eventually outdate all piloted aircraft. The Air Force is still mulling over the need for a TX replacement plan. In the meantime foreign Air Forces are already purchasing advance trainers capable of duplicating 4th and 5th generation fighter stresses at 10/3g's giving a four year edge in advance training for their pilots. Still I'm sure we have a work around...

That is very good to hear. Please keep us inoformed on this board with any more updates you get. Much appreciated.

Jim Worsham has recovered quite well from his injuries.
I talked to one of the reps over the phone last night and he said Mr. Worsham is eager to get back to work and make some deals.

I hope he recovers and wish him well.

I found this article on the High Desert News.
I'm wondering just how tough this man is and if he will recover enough to resume working with USAE. Why didn't USAE post this news.
http://www.highdesert.com/articles/accident-25458-vvdailypress-worsham-car.html
My other question would be, was this just a random accident or was the competition gettting nervous?

Funding dramtically increased for T-38 program.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/02/21/353433/usaf-funding-for-t-38-replacement-jumps-tenfold-in-latest-spending.html

I’ve scanned a few defense blogs and some are saying RFP’s by September for the Marine One Contract. I wouldn’t hold my breath on New Zealand due to earthquake repairs putting off most defense contracts into 2012 and beyond. I scanned 3192 proposals on Gets and most look like infrastructure RFP’s for now.
Still some say the new AVIC AC 313 is based on the old SA 321 Super Frelon. I somewhat agree but on closer inspection some of the design looks to be a hybrid cross of the MI-24. Here’s the latest http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/2011/03/11/20110311mesa-boeing-marine-one-navy.html
I won’t be posting for a while. I have a site survey to complete in Australia. Thanks for the offer I may take you up on it when I return.

We know USAE is already working with Boeing on some existing projects and the AVIC connection just opens up more possibilities. I would just like to see some news directly from USAE on these developments soon.

Also ICGGRASSBII, you are doing a very good job providing new info to this board. Would you like to be an Assistant Moderator here? If so, you will be able to add new info directly to the iBox. Just let me know and I will put you on.

In another headline two Chinese Airlines just inked two 10 Bln dollar deals with Boeing.
http://malaysia.sports.yahoo.com/news/tbs-boeing-7318940-rtrs-20110308.html I really am starting to see some speculative driving potential with USAE and AVIC. I may be coming off as a bit mendacious but China is going to want some reciprocation for keeping us in the black with their American orders. This for that adage could play out very well with the USAE and the AVIC deal. Jim Worsham is a veteran and I think he was picked or possibly placed in his position for a very good reason. In the over all global Aerospace market deals like this generate full duplex free market capitalism. This ups the ante as far as I am concerned.

Here's another article from the Wall Street Journal today that mentions the AVIC-USAE connection:

Link:
http://blogs.wsj.com/in-charge/2011/03/07/china-u-s-aviation-deal-faces-scrutiny/?mod=google_news_blog
---------------------------------------------------
March 7, 2011, 3:35 PM ET
China-U.S. Aviation Deal Faces Scrutiny
By Angus Loten

The proposed purchase of a Minnesota-based small-aircraft maker by China’s state-run aviation giant announced last week will be reviewed by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., the companies said in a joint statement.

The inter-agency committee reviews foreign acquisitions that pose a potential threat to national security.

Terms of the deal, between China Aviation Industry General Aircraft Co., Ltd., a unit of China Aviation Industry Corp., and Duluth-based Cirrus Aviation Industry Corp., were not disclosed. If approved, the Chinese state-run firm would have full access to Cirrus’s line of four-seat turbo-prop planes, along with technology for a small jet in development.

Cirrus CEO Brent Wouters says the two sides sought a national security review of the deal as a preemptive move, saying they “didn’t want it to become a political football.” He expects the acquisition to be approved because Cirrus isn’t a high-tech aviations firm with national security-sensitive trade secrets.

China Aviation Industry Corp, known as AVIC, also manufactures a stealth jet fighter in China and has come under scrutiny before for bidding on U.S. defense contracts. It is currently working with U.S. Aerospace Ltd., a California-based manufacturer, to develop a fleet of helicopters used by the president.

Last November, the foreign investment committee blocked a $2 million acquisition of a small U.S. technology start-up by Chinese telecommunications firm Huawei Technologies Co., one of just a handful of China-U.S. deals struck down in recent years.

In 2007, the committee came under attack for clearing the sale of six U.S. commercial ports to a Dubai-based firm. Lawmakers have since pushed for greater transparency and congressional oversight in the review process.

AVIC’s move to buy Cirrus comes amid a surge of dealmaking between U.S. small- and midsized businesses and cash-rich Chinese companies – a trend we covered last week.

Cirrus employs about 400 workers in Duluth, along with a team of 70 workers at a second production facility in Grand Forks, North Dakota, and about 30 sales officials.

Wouters says the deal will help the company expand in the global market while creating jobs at home. He describes the deal as the “next chapter on a global stage.”

In a joint statement, China Aviation Industry General Aircraft President Meng Xiangkai said the company was committed to creating “job opportunities in Duluth and Grand Forks.”

Rep. Chip Cravaack (R., Minn.) told Minnesota public radio last week that he plans to meet with Cirrus executives and the director of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission to ensure aviation jobs stay in Minnesota.

Eads will not protest tanker bid.
http://www.industryweek.com/articles/eads_will_not_protest_boeing_tanker_contract_24049.aspx?SectionID=1
Boeing will deliver first 4 aircraft by 2017.
http://www.kansas.com/2011/03/05/1748263/eads-will-not-appeal-air-forces.html
I still see an opportunity for USAE to pick up some of the KCX work as is posted for Michigan as well as other suppliers nationwide.
http://taktikz.com/blog/2011/02/25/boeing-contract-a-boon-to-michigan-aerospace-suppliers/
Given I see a better chance for a T-38 trainer bid than a Marine One bid. I don't see USAE making the same mistakes in their future contract proposals. Related Aerospace expected to increase 19% http://www.gcx-online.com/gcx/article.asp?magarticle_id=791

Very interesting. Thanks for the story link today. Please post whatever else you find to this USAE board.

China to Buy U.S. Plane Maker


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704728004576176243061806326.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs

Here's the original news on USAE's plans for the New Zealand aircraft project...

U.S. Aerospace, Inc. to Bid on Military Transport Aircraft for New Zealand

LOS ANGELES, Jul 27, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- U.S. Aerospace, Inc. (OTCBB: USAE), a U.S. aerospace and defense contractor, today announced that it has submitted to the Defence Minister of New Zealand notice of the Company's intent to bid to supply maritime surveillance and military transport aircraft. The requirements under this proposal will be outlined in the country's defence review document, a White Paper due to be released in September 2010.

"U.S. Aerospace, Inc. is pleased to present New Zealand with a cost efficient aircraft solution to support its surveillance and transport programs," said U.S. Aerospace, Inc. director Michael L. Goldberg. "We believe that our aircraft would be the most practical solution to performing transport and maritime surveillance work in the South Pacific, including assistance with disaster relief and humanitarian aid."

About U.S. Aerospace, Inc.

U.S. Aerospace, Inc. is a publicly traded aerospace and defense contractor based in Southern California. U.S. Aerospace is an emerging world-class supplier on projects for the U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force, Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT - News), L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: LLL - News), the Middle River Aircraft Systems subsidiary of General Electric Company (NYSE: GE - News), and other aerospace companies, commercial aircraft manufacturers and prime defense contractors. The Company supplies aircraft assemblies, structural components and highly-engineered, precision-machined details for commercial and military aircraft. It is also a leading manufacturer and remanufacturer of specialized aircraft machining tools, including vertical boring mills and large Vertical Turning Centers used to manufacture the largest jet engines, airplane landing gear, and other precision components. U.S. Aerospace has offices and production facilities in Santa Fe Springs and Rancho Cucamonga, California.

For further information please visit the Company's website at http://www.USAerospace.com.

Forward Looking Statements

Except for statements of historical fact, the matters discussed above are forward looking and made pursuant to the Safe Harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements reflect numerous assumptions and involve a variety of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company's control, that may cause actual results to differ materially from stated expectations. These risk factors include, among others, dependence on its key supplier, limited capital resources, intense competition, government regulation, complications and risks related to bidding on government contracts, and difficulty in aerospace product and parts manufacturing; as well as additional risks factors discussed in the reports filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are available on its website at http://www.sec.gov. Except as required by law, the Company undertakes no obligation to update any information.

SOURCE: U.S. Aerospace, Inc.


CONTACT:
U.S. Aerospace, Inc.
Investor Relations Services Richard Fixaris, +1-386-409-0200

Copyright Business Wire 2010

Thanks again for your info. Keep it coming and post it here please. We would certainly like to hear more on USAE's contracts for the New Zealand Trainer and surveillance aircraft. That was a project announced some time ago that could be a major boost here now.

My standings on Boeing winning the competition.
Bribes equals a star and a consultant position. Somebody got his star. Let's take a look at an article posted in August 2009.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/company-news/will-boeing-move-to-beijing/19145771/
It is suggested that the first tanker will not be ready for at least ten years. Once this is completed do you really think the company will maintain the so called proposed 48,000 workers? Does this number include current employees? I suppose there was no actual time limits imposed on how long the company had to maintain these workers. I would expect USAE and Antonov could actually propose a type of assembly plant at the SCLA that current foreign car manufacturers are typically using in the USA. This would actually keep decent jobs in the U.S for a greater period of time. Union labor is not necessary and the workers could still maintain good pay and good benefits. I'm all for union employee’s just not union labor leaders and the bondholders who make more money than most state senators with benefit packages that far out cede most CEO's. Yes I'm talking about GM. Just look at Chevy and who really got screwed. Eads if you’re reading this it should be your duty to protest the heck out of this.I also suggest all California residents who need work get involved if you want multi billion dollar contracts in your area.
I may have some news later on about the New Zealand Trainer and surveillance contracts. You can get a lot of info if you register on their defense site. Everything is made in China...Everything. Isn't that right Owego.

STOCK PRICE MOVING UP TODAY

Perhaps there is a new push coming

Lots of value here if they can resolve their struggles

GD

Good points. I saw the Air Force award of the KC-X project to Boeing last week too. My first reaction was that it was a plus for USAE since we already have an established working relationship with Boeing. However, any situation that allows a re-bid by USAE could be very interesting.

Will EADS file a protest on Boeings Award of the KCX Tanker contract?
Personally it is my opinion that the GAO is fraught with massive corruption internally, and that the GAO should be investigated for any wrong doings. My first point... A government accountability office for government oversight is like putting the fox into the hen house. If you look at past whistleblowers in the government they all got fired. Talk about corruption. Hence will EADS file and more diligently will they take it to the world courts. Everyone said EADS had an unfair advantage with the data swap over Boeing. It is my opinion that the data swap could have given an unfair advantage to Boeing as well. I not only hope they file a protest, but they should also file it in the courts. In the recent past it was brought forward that Boeing indeed receive government subsidies. I expect USAE might receive some part of a contract in helping to build the KCX. However a valid protest would make for one heck of a re-bid. I say EADS would be crazy not to.
We will know in about two weeks. Boeings subsidies will allow for a new Antonov/USAE bid if this happens. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/eads-may-protest-boeing-contract-2011-02-25?reflink=MW_news_stmp
Antonov and USAE still have an agreement until July that could be extended in the event of a re-bid. If not I think the Boeing award would be more favorable for a sub contract possibility for USAE

Here's another story about USAE and AVIC moving forward with plans for U.S. aviation contracts. Note the mention here of an entry for a new fleet of jet trainers to replace the aging T-38 models still in U.S. and other services today.

Chinese to Compete for Future Marine One Contract

February 10, 2011 —The state-run China Aviation Industry Corp., known as AVIC, has teamed with a small California-based aircraft company to possibly bid for U.S. defense contracts including the future replacement for the Marine One Presidential helicopter fleet. AVIC, which purchased a share of Epic Aircraft last year and is the producer of the J-20 stealth fighter, is working with U.S. Aerospace Inc. to offer up its AC-313 helicopter, its largest homegrown helicopter.

Whether AVIC could convince U.S. political leaders to allow Chinese participation in defense contracts is not deterring its plans as the company and U.S. Aerospace are also planning to offer AVIC’s L-15 jet trainer as a replacement for the U.S. Air Force’s T-38. According to the Wall Street Journal the contract to replace the T-38 would be lucrative as the U.S. is looking to replace 400 jet trainers and its allies are looking to replace an additional 600. It may be a tough competition as AVIC’s attempts to compete in other U.S. sectors such as energy and telecommunications have been thwarted in the past.

Link: http://www.eaa.org/news/2011/2011-02-10_contract.asp

Hi GD, as you can see from the recent posts on this board there have been a bunch of stories in the news on USAE and AVIC preparing for new aerospace projects. When we see something directly in a PR this stock should get moving again.