sealordlawrence…not out of touch because the argument was Boing is the only one with tankers that would be able to meet the RFP..look at all the KC-135s…so we possibly can’t buy another Boing, that just wouldn’t be fair.
The point is which best meets the RFP.
sealordlawrenceAnd that is why they changed the RFP to make Airbus the winner…with the original RFP..(That RFP being what was needed and what the USAF wanted) Airbus had no chance in hell to win…so both Airbus and NG flipped out and threatened exactly what you mentioned…to never offer another plane to the US again.
So then, was this a sympathy bid, Boeing not having a chance in hell because they were written out of the competition?
The A330 and the 777 are close enough in size for Boeing to stay in the competition if they wanted a large plane… the USAF wrote back and told them not to bid the 777 because they needed and wanted a medium (767) sized plane…
Bait and switch no matter how you look at it…
So, in the end, this deal is just as bad if not worse then the very bad original 767 tanker lease deal.
Don’t get me wrong…I honestly do not have anything against the A330 as a tanker…if it was bit and fairly won the competition on its own, on its own merits. But to have the RFP changed…if flat out bad business. Also if Boeing had demanded the RFP changed to fit its needs..then that would be bad too…I am not defending Boeing here, I am not slamming Airbus here… I am throwing all the blame and fault on the USAF procurement team.
All this has been covered here before and shown to be nonsense. You are purely speculating and have no facts or evidence. The USAF selected the tanker it wanted, in doing so the DoD has prevented a Boeing monopoly and everyone except Boeing and its horde of politicians are not happpy. Your problem is obviously that a European design was selected and thus not based on rational thought. The KC-45 may well have won the competition for all we know and the DoD just decided to make it indisputable.
sealordlawrenceOk, when you go to the store, and there are two cans of beans from two different companies… and you choose one over the other, the one you chose does not have a monopoly over the other. If you go back and buy other products from that same company over the other company, that does not mean that that company had a monopoly over the other….because there was still the choice.
Boeing does not have a Monopoly with any of its aircraft…in any market.
Again proving my point whilst completely missing it yourself. Boeing does not have a monopoly because of Airbus/EAD’s (currently, this is likely to change in the long term as new manufacturers enter the market), if the US only procures from US companies then there will be only one that can provide airliner derived tankers, that is Boeing thus Boeing will have a monopoly and will be able to charge what it likes. This is about preventing monopoly, as someone else has already pointed out to you if this deal went to Boeing there is no way in hell that EAD’s would bid for anything in the US again. See what happened to South Korea’s recent fighter procurement as an example.
sealordlawrenceWhen was the production of the KC-135 stopped…where the heck is this monopoly you talk about?
What are you talking about? That perfectly proves my point, its a Boeing product and it went out of production years ago.:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceOk, by this logic, no one builds tankers for the US right now except for Lockheed…Boeing and McD had stopped a long time ago and airbus has not started building the KC-45A yet… so then, no one builds them for the US.
So, how do you have a monopoly when no one builds a airliner style tanker for the US
I was just pointing out that the monopoly statement was unfounded and does not fit the model of a monopoly.
I was not suggesting scrapping a tanker for a KC-130..you said that no one builts tankers in the US….Lockmart currently builds the KC-130J
It is perfectly founded and you are twisting reality to defend the indefensible. Lockheed does not make airliners any more, thats why they did not run in this competition. Only Boeing in the US builds airliner derived tankers now, if they get the contract now (after the airforce has selected the plane it wants) Boeing will have a monopoly. This option brings a new manufactuer/designer to the US market and keeps Boeing in its place.
sealordlawrenceKC-10, KDC-10
And when were they designed, produced and then production stopped?:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceYou didn’t say currently build 🙂
LockMart had the L1011 tanker and well KC-130 (and can be fitted with a comfort pallet w/ seats ….not comfortable, but yet neither are RJs
So how is a company that no longer builds airliners going to prevent a company that does from getting a monopoly? I would love to see the moment when you try to tell the USAF that they can scrap their airliner airframes for Herkules.:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceyeah but with regards to the vodka issue, some 50% of Russian men are dying by the age of 50 due to alchol so it is a very real problem not one imagined by the western media.
Wandered around a British town or city in the early hours of morning before?:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceI hardly think reading one book by Antonio Giustozzi will make me any sort of expert or authority on the subject to be honest, and how do you know what Mr Giustozzi writes is entirely accurate? No disrespect to the guy or anyone who reads his books, ive never heard of him and for all i know he may be very good but like i say reading one book dosn’t make one an expert.
It will make you far more of an expert than you are now. Obviously there is an extensive literature on the subject but in my opinion his book is the best.
sealordlawrenceWell it might not be a win yet but you can’t say it has been a disaster on the levels of the Soviet invasion of it which was my point, i never said we’d won already just compared the two aproaches.
Your source should be ‘Koran, Kalashnikov and Laptop: The Neo-Taliban Insurgency in Afghanistan’ by Antonio Giustozzi. Then when you know what you are talking about please feel free to come back and comment.
sealordlawrenceit reflects a time when the world was managed correctly.
I would not go around saying that, especially in most countries in Africa, or the Indian sub-continent.
sealordlawrenceit reflects a time when the world was managed correctly.
I would not go around saying that, especially in most countries in Africa, or the Indian sub-continent.
sealordlawrenceI should say so, along with that funny salute and silly walks.
Seriously, this medal seems to have been established long before any Nazi involvement and appears to have become, well up untill 1945 at least, a part of the establishment, so where’s the problem. We winge about the loss of our established, traditional icons, so why shouldn’t they be allowed to ressurect theirs. Are we concerned that the Russians are now relating to their former glories in whatever form it took and we are now trying to deny the Germans their own history.
Nazism was evil, we all know that, but it happened and can’t be swept under the carpet. There are so many artifacts from that time hidden away, look at Fascist art, is it to be forever locked in the vaults, why are we so frightened of the past, I think it’s unlikely that introducing the Iron Cross will cause hordes to march across the Nuremburg Stadium, and what if they did, we have other cultures to worry about.
I remember watching the British led invasion of Kosovo on Sky and the great amount of publicity given to the German armoured division that supported them, it was compared to nervously watching the Afrika Korps move into position, thats what we were being told, bloody ridiculous, we have to move on, and medals from the history of this great nation, whatever it’s past ‘merits’ should be accepted wholeheartedly with respect to their past.
Incidentally, how many Germans have been involved in any firefights and have any been actually killed in any situation, I would be interested to know whether they have been let off the NATO leash.
Whilst the German forces were defeated trying to promote and defend an evil ideology their fight was one of the most remarkable in human history. For any army to make a last stand in its own capital city after 5 years of near total war is astonishing and politics and war crimes aside it is something that the German military establishment should be proud of. Now compare it to France in 1940 and see what I mean.
sealordlawrenceI should say so, along with that funny salute and silly walks.
Seriously, this medal seems to have been established long before any Nazi involvement and appears to have become, well up untill 1945 at least, a part of the establishment, so where’s the problem. We winge about the loss of our established, traditional icons, so why shouldn’t they be allowed to ressurect theirs. Are we concerned that the Russians are now relating to their former glories in whatever form it took and we are now trying to deny the Germans their own history.
Nazism was evil, we all know that, but it happened and can’t be swept under the carpet. There are so many artifacts from that time hidden away, look at Fascist art, is it to be forever locked in the vaults, why are we so frightened of the past, I think it’s unlikely that introducing the Iron Cross will cause hordes to march across the Nuremburg Stadium, and what if they did, we have other cultures to worry about.
I remember watching the British led invasion of Kosovo on Sky and the great amount of publicity given to the German armoured division that supported them, it was compared to nervously watching the Afrika Korps move into position, thats what we were being told, bloody ridiculous, we have to move on, and medals from the history of this great nation, whatever it’s past ‘merits’ should be accepted wholeheartedly with respect to their past.
Incidentally, how many Germans have been involved in any firefights and have any been actually killed in any situation, I would be interested to know whether they have been let off the NATO leash.
Whilst the German forces were defeated trying to promote and defend an evil ideology their fight was one of the most remarkable in human history. For any army to make a last stand in its own capital city after 5 years of near total war is astonishing and politics and war crimes aside it is something that the German military establishment should be proud of. Now compare it to France in 1940 and see what I mean.
sealordlawrenceYeah and your US flag waving fanboy bias is really good, you sure know a lot about giving someone the benefit of the doubt, other than the grandiose US military. What a tool you are. . . :rolleyes: Just because your logical thinking is about a complete failure doesn’t mean other people can’t think through sources a little better than you. You need everything in bold print on Jane’s. . .
It was tested on the SMT, and no one bought the Zhuk-F, again, what is your point? That it doesn’t exist? Because it does, it’s just not in active service. You are making a fuss over the letters “F” and “E” .
No I have proven you wrong yet again because you are completely ignorant about Russian weapons. The radarhas never been offered to any customer in a ready state thus we can assume that it is not a realistic option now that the Zhuk-AE is ongoing.
I notice that once again you have failed to provide sources or show any capacity to evaluate them.
Sign In
