If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How Boeing steered tanker bid
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm
But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. -HJC |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. I personally have a problem with US military equipment being manufactured by another nation. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Henry J Cobb
wrote: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. -HJC Cost less maybe, but you get what you pay for. More capable, no way. Using the same engines, the bus struggles to get to 31,000 fully loaded at 350,00. The 767 goes right up to 37,000 carrying 400,000. Used to watch the USair bus struggle to make IAD from ORY while the 767 went to ORD and DFW with no sweat. -- Ron |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Parsons" wrote in message Henry J Cobb wrote: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. -HJC Cost less maybe, but you get what you pay for. More capable, no way. Using the same engines, the bus struggles to get to 31,000 fully loaded at 350,00. The 767 goes right up to 37,000 carrying 400,000. Used to watch the USair bus struggle to make IAD from ORY while the 767 went to ORD and DFW with no sweat. -- Ron Plus nothing like having a foreign power having that kind of power on what we do as a country by withholding spares. and as a side note if the airbus tanker(istr doesn't exist yet) was such a good product why did Italy go with boeing? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Parsons wrote in message ...
Cost less maybe, but you get what you pay for. More capable, no way. Using the same engines, the bus struggles to get to 31,000 fully loaded at 350,00. The 767 goes right up to 37,000 carrying 400,000. Used to watch the USair bus struggle to make IAD from ORY while the 767 went to ORD and DFW with no sweat. Minor nit..."Carrying" 400k? Surely you must mean a max t.o. weight? Typical payloads I see on those stage lengths is about 60-65k for a 767-200. Any more than that at those stage lengths and it gets a bit tough if there is any weather at the destination. The -400 can be a real headache. So what happens if either a 'bus or Boeing loses DC power? How far will either likely fly then? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
David Hartung wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. I personally have a problem with US military equipment being manufactured by another nation. But if you had to choose, you'd rather buy military equipment from France instead of China, no? http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/h...0403291311.htm Mullaly noted that the essential parts of approximately 3,400 Boeing aircraft in service worldwide today were assembled in China, occupying one-third of the whole Boeing fleet. -HJC |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 13:19:35 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. -HJC The "San Jose Mercury News" is famous for its inaccurate reporting and far left wing POV. This one does not pass the "smell test". Al Minyard |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Minyard schrieb:
A small note here, Airbus has never built a tanker. So? Boeing had to start once at scratch, too. And Airbus is currently working on it for the RAF. Al Minyard Gruss, Roman |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:57:38 GMT, "David Hartung"
wrote: "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...ld/8297433.htm But the e-mail and other documents show just how intent the Air Force was on steering the deal to Boeing, even though Airbus' tankers were more capable and cost less. I personally have a problem with US military equipment being manufactured by another nation. Tell it to the Marines.........they're driving around Canadian built LAVs :-) And don't even get me started on how much US Army gear was designed elsewhere. --- Peter Kemp Life is short - drink faster |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Boeing Boondoggle | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 77 | September 15th 04 02:39 AM |
Boeing B-767 Tanker case "Virtual Kryptonite" | BJ | Military Aviation | 1 | December 20th 03 05:15 AM |
Boeing fires top officials over tanker lease scam. | Henry J. Cobb | Military Aviation | 2 | November 25th 03 06:15 AM |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 139 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |
Boeing Set For Huge Profits From Tanker Deal | ZZBunker | Military Aviation | 2 | July 4th 03 03:18 AM |