Boeing awarded $35B AF Tanker contract!

[Elhuero]

BINGO!

We have a winner.

Personally, I can not stand Boeing. I worked for them for a whole 3 months and couldn't stand how that "ran" things. The company is just a bunch of arrogant self-serving whiney b!tches that think the contract was supposed to have just been handed to them and they cried foul when it wasn't.

It's a wonder Boeing had the cajones and audacity to raise a stink about the percieved unfairness in the acquisition process of this whole deal after they were caught bribing the USAF #1 Acquisition officer (http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/03/...boeing-scandal ; http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0105/010505g1.htm).

Yeah; they've got some balls! As taxpayers, let's just hope they can produce a safe and quality aircraft without fleecing the American citizen any more than they already have.

they probably have a union too.

[sniper7]

saw a 135 take off on wednesday just before I did. seemed to be doing fine!

glad to see nice new airplanes being built though! todays technology is amazing for aircraft

[Byte Stryke]

BINGO!

We have a winner.

Personally, I can not stand Boeing. I worked for them for a whole 3 months and couldn't stand how that "ran" things. The company is just a bunch of arrogant self-serving whiney b!tches that think the contract was supposed to have just been handed to them and they cried foul when it wasn't.

It's a wonder Boeing had the cajones and audacity to raise a stink about the percieved unfairness in the acquisition process of this whole deal after they were caught bribing the USAF #1 Acquisition officer (http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/03/...boeing-scandal ; http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0105/010505g1.htm).

Yeah; they've got some balls! As taxpayers, let's just hope they can produce a safe and quality aircraft without fleecing the American citizen any more than they already have.

they probably have a union too.

The article didn't say anything about it, but I am sure somewhere hookers were also involved

[Hoosier]

If the crew tries to do something HAL doesn't agree with, it doesn't happen.

Although the class of aircraft we're discussing here are stable enough for human flight without computers, all modern generation fighters are inherently unstable. If the ship was flown with all the flight surfaces fixed, it would roll over, nose down and crash. The computers interpret the pilots inputs and the inputs of all the gyro's and figure out how to actually move the flight surfaces.

There's also things like FADEC, the Full Authority Digital Engine Controller, it's what actually controls your turbines. It monitors all the internal pressures, spin speeds, vibration, fuel flow, and it's what ultimately is responsible for preventing the engine from destroying itself due to incorrect pilot input.

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords. (this is my sarcasm font)

Also, I believe that Airbus products simply use too much plastic. At least one lost its vertical stabilizer over New York city. That was a very bad day for the cargo. It was especially hard on the flight deck crew as they were the first people to arrive at the scene of the wreck. I prefer to fly as cargo on transports with maximum metal/minimal plastic. Of course, I'm just showing my age that way.

You know that the new Boeing Dreamliner 787 has an entirely composite fuselage? The new giant Airbus has "GLARE", which is Glass-fiber and Aluminum Layered up, running along the leading edges of the flight surfaces. The various densities of each layer allows it to absorb and break up impacts. Neat stuff

H.

[Troublco]

Lockheed took a Fairchild-Dornier 328 Jet and built an almost all composite fuselage for it; converted it into a small airlifter and called it the X-55. It was built as a technology demonstrator, never designed to go into production. But still interesting. Next phase if I remember correctly is to build a composite wing for it.

[Hoosier]

787 has composite wings, here's video of failure testing a section of the "box", the wing root and a section of the wings, this is the portion of the airplane that does most of the actual lifting.

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/...wing-breaking/

I hadn't heard of the X-55 before, not a bad looking little cargo hauler.

H.

[Byte Stryke]

787 has composite wings, here's video of failure testing a section of the "box", the wing root and a section of the wings, this is the portion of the airplane ... blah blah blah blah

H.

dag nabbit.... Airplane nerds
I sed HOOKERS!

[jgang]

BINGO!

We have a winner.

Personally, I can not stand Boeing. I worked for them for a whole 3 months and couldn't stand how that "ran" things. The company is just a bunch of arrogant self-serving whiney b!tches that think the contract was supposed to have just been handed to them and they cried foul when it wasn't.

It's a wonder Boeing had the cajones and audacity to raise a stink about the percieved unfairness in the acquisition process of this whole deal after they were caught bribing the USAF #1 Acquisition officer (http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/03/...boeing-scandal ; http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0105/010505g1.htm).

Yeah; they've got some balls! As taxpayers, let's just hope they can produce a safe and quality aircraft without fleecing the American citizen any more than they already have.

Hope to hear how you REALLY feel sometime Thomas. LOL!

[ronaldrwl]

BINGO!

We have a winner.

Personally, I can not stand Boeing. I worked for them for a whole 3 months and couldn't stand how that "ran" things. The company is just a bunch of arrogant self-serving whiney b!tches that think the contract was supposed to have just been handed to them and they cried foul when it wasn't.

It's a wonder Boeing had the cajones and audacity to raise a stink about the percieved unfairness in the acquisition process of this whole deal after they were caught bribing the USAF #1 Acquisition officer (http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2010/03/...boeing-scandal ; http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0105/010505g1.htm).

Yeah; they've got some balls! As taxpayers, let's just hope they can produce a safe and quality aircraft without fleecing the American citizen any more than they already have.

I have to set the record straight with all this ignorance about a great American company that almost got screwed (Boeing) and another that did get screwed (Northrop).
I've had the opposite experience the last 6 years. Boeing is one of the best companies to work for. Period. TheGinsue You had one bad experience with Boeing and your totally misinformed on this issue.

I've lived this whole tanker issue from near the inside and without going into details Boeing bid the original contract to spec.

<sidetrack> Boeing had to go to court to stop the US Gov from funding EADS (“it wasn't fair for the Europeans to have to compete against big bad Boeing”) but EADS was selling more plans than Boeing! More stupid wasted money by the US Gov. </sidetrack>

The EADS Northrup team bid a very different plane that did not meet the Air force's requirements but they they won anyways (inside shenanigans IMO). Boeing protested and won. How could they lose being the only team that bid the exact specs of the AF? Long story short the whole thing got over turned and rebid. Northrup pulled out because of all the wasted money bidding a contract controlled by shameful idiots in Washington. The plane that actually met the AF specs won and the contract went to a great USA company. Win Win

[ColoWyo]

The Airbus can be a decent machine -- until the electrons go on vacation.

I've read that Boeing products essentially have a "kill HAL" switch that reduces the computers' cognitive abilities to that of an infant -- just enough to help the aircrew with basic control. The computer -- "HAL" -- controls an Airbus. If the crew tries to do something HAL doesn't agree with, it doesn't happen. I imagine this can be a bad thing at times when military aviators are performing some sort of gonzo mission.

Also, I believe that Airbus products simply use too much plastic. At least one lost its vertical stabilizer over New York city. That was a very bad day for the cargo. It was especially hard on the flight deck crew as they were the first people to arrive at the scene of the wreck. I prefer to fly as cargo on transports with maximum metal/minimal plastic. Of course, I'm just showing my age that way.

The A320 will let you do any normal maneuver that a tanker would be doing. It limits the pitch to 30 degree's nose up, 15 degree's nose down, and 67 degree's of bank. There are high and low speed protections as well.

As to the crash over NY, that was pilot error.