Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich and others, heads the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the hearings will look into "the propriety of the procurement process of the KC-X tanker blast us law makers for betrayal and out sorcing america
So, what now? We have a choice of 3. 1. The 767, imho the best tanker for the job, but deal with bad management practices. 2. The EADS tanker, a much larger airframe that we don't really need, and deal with having to pay to upgrade existing runways, ramps, and hangers for the larger size (would create more jobs, but unskilled labor instead of high tech). last and worst of all #3. buy a portion a of both tankers (see choices 1 and 2 for reasons) plus the logistics of having 2 airframes. We lose!
The American taxpayer will lose a buttload of money on this contract and the sad thing is it is because the business practices of The Boeing Company and passed Air Force leadership. We would at this very moment in time have new tankers in the Air Force inventory. More than a dozen years back, instead of just selling the Air Force the new 767 tanker, Boeing wanted to lease them to the government. The whole deal was just eye candy for the average taxpayer, and would make money for Boeing VIPs.
@hotrod4you2
"Fuck you" "You r a real moron"?
I take it you think I'm wrong. Care to elaborate a bit?
BlizBob 1 year ago
@BlizBob YOU R A REAL MORON
hotrod4you2 1 year ago
@BlizBob FUCK YOU
hotrod4you2 1 year ago
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich and others, heads the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the hearings will look into "the propriety of the procurement process of the KC-X tanker blast us law makers for betrayal and out sorcing america
hotrod4you2 1 year ago
What a cry baby.
What does she think? If for example France and US disagree the air tankers stop flying because they symphatise with France?
Our main fighter is F-18. If we disagree with US they stop working?
If US disagrees with Germany the M1A2 tanks can't fire their main guns?
She's full of BS.
BlizBob 3 years ago
So, what now? We have a choice of 3. 1. The 767, imho the best tanker for the job, but deal with bad management practices. 2. The EADS tanker, a much larger airframe that we don't really need, and deal with having to pay to upgrade existing runways, ramps, and hangers for the larger size (would create more jobs, but unskilled labor instead of high tech). last and worst of all #3. buy a portion a of both tankers (see choices 1 and 2 for reasons) plus the logistics of having 2 airframes. We lose!
777arion 3 years ago
The American taxpayer will lose a buttload of money on this contract and the sad thing is it is because the business practices of The Boeing Company and passed Air Force leadership. We would at this very moment in time have new tankers in the Air Force inventory. More than a dozen years back, instead of just selling the Air Force the new 767 tanker, Boeing wanted to lease them to the government. The whole deal was just eye candy for the average taxpayer, and would make money for Boeing VIPs.
777arion 3 years ago
hahaha the best way to piss americans off is to deny them 40billion dollars and give it to the french hahaha
BlikjeBier 3 years ago
Kiss your senate seat good bye Peppermit Patty! Day late and a sound byte later, time for a real Senator!
maxvalley 3 years ago
Airbus is not selling airplanes to Iran and Venezuela.
Florek777 3 years ago