http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/boeing-leaning-toward-kc-767/

Boeing “leaning” toward KC-767

Boeing is “leaning” toward offering the KC-767 to the US Air Force in the KC-X competition, an executive revealed at a conference in Everett (WA) today. Boeing previously has been coy about whether it will offer the KC-767, or a tanker based on the 777 or two separate bids, one for each airplane.

surprise of the year :rolleyes:

One of the problems with the Italian tanker–which is very similar to the specifications the USAF had for the KC-X in the 2006 competition–was flutter issues with the wing refueling pods. Boeing, after a long and difficult period, fixed this problem. But we are told it has not fixed aerodynamic problems with the centerline fuselage hose-and-drogue system (which is in addition to the aft refueling boom). This is said to be the cause behind the continuing delays.

It is a publicly available source. I found it. Have you even tried to find it? I doubt it because then you would have one more thing not to sidetrack the discussion with.

if sidetracking the discussion bothers you, then post the file

oh wait, sidetracking the discussion is your whole goal, lol

You have yet to demonstate anything I have posted to be a lie.

sure i did

I provided the title, when is was released, who created it for/in conjunction with whom & a simple description of the document (for context).

let us see a typical pfcem response to being proven a liar:

He has done no such thing.

He has simply continued to demonstate his ingorance &/or disengenousness.

During the KC-X solicitation, the Secretary of Defence had such far reaching oversight (which he deligated to the Under Secretary of Defense) that it was he who effectively controlled the process. No decision of significance could be made without being checked with & agreed to by the Secretary/Under Secretary or who ever on their own personal KC-X team such specifics were deligated/entrusted to. So while it may have been United States Department of the Air Force/Department of Defense personnel who did the “physical” work, it was the Secretary/Under Secretary of Defence who controlled the process.

step 1: deny the plainly proven truth (with plenty of documentation i might add)
step 2: provide zero evidence to backup his claim

where is the title or when it was released or who created it?
where is a simple description of the document?

If you were informed as you make yourself out to be

what representations have i made about myself?

you would already have the pdf (&/or all the relavant information contained within it

it’s not my responsibility to go engage in a scavenger hunt

if YOU want to use information from a document, YOU need to provide it

that’s part of the whole OPEN thing you claim to support

That is an outright lie & you know it.

here’s a novel idea, instead of arguing that you always provide your sources, why don’t you, you know, ACUTALLY PROVIDE YOUR SOURCES

you say you’ve given them before? i don’t care. if you’ve given them 100 times and some asks again, give them 101 times

your dogged determination to continually repeat your lies even after they have been proven lies shows that this should be no great hardship to you

except it would be a hardship, because you aren’t actually interested in an open, truthful debate. your only interest is in distorting the debate with half-truth and outright lies so it leads to your favored conclusion

actually providing real documentation to back-up your claims would show how full of holes they are

we can’t have that, now can we

you claim you want a truthful, open debate, fine, PROVE IT

when someone asks for documentation, provide it, no matter how many times you have (or haven’t really) given it in the past

i’m not holding my breath, but there’s your way out if you so desire

Could you be any more pathetic?

i could strive for pfcem levels, but it’s not in my nature to be so deceitful

I have given the context!

i don’t see a link to that pdf anywhere

you’re all about suppressing information that counters your position instead of trying to counter it with better information

until you are committed to an OPEN, truthful debate, your ‘contributions’ will remain pointless

I have given my sources COUNTLESS times

saying ‘my source is a pdf that i have and you don’t neener neener neener’ just reaffirms how petty and immature you are

and even on other stuff, i’ve watched you and you’ve used the phrase ‘i have give my sources countless times’ far more often than you have actually given your sources

if you gave your source once 4 years ago on a different message board, no, that doesn’t count, not everyone can be expected to read all of your massive ramblings

pro tip: save a file with quick links to all the facts you like to spout, then you only have to look them up once and they’re all handy for future reference

this would actually save you time as you have to spend less time arguing that you always give you sources (as opposed to, you know, actually giving your sources)