Comments on: The Real Reason for Boeing’s Protest

By: Archlord cheap

Archlord cheap — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:41:56 +0000

Do not because Archlord cheap than ignore your favorite, If you ignore your favorite, you will regret a lifetime. In the end I hope that we will not hurt the parents

By: flyff money

flyff money — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:30:04 +0000

from fear the beginning of the BB I to the present personal danger of me. I spend not only the flyff money but also my feeling.

By: kamas

kamas — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:50:53 +0000

do you really can forget me and forget the day s about we together to play and together to upgrade and together to earn the kamas, you really can forget

By: cabal alz

cabal alz — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:44:45 +0000

Look at the cabal alz; I think of many things, I very would like to return to the original place to say that in fact, I really love you very much.

By: 2moons gold

2moons gold — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:36:50 +0000

they often like to ask something about the players looks like, family, and in the game can earn how much 2moons gold, I do not know these people are playing the game or game play them

By: Requiem Lant

Requiem Lant — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 07:01:25 +0000

I believe that everyone who like playing Requiem Game all know the Avenging Angel Preview of Requiem Lant is very good.

By: Tibia coins

Tibia coins — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 06:58:02 +0000

Tibia is free, and players are welcome to play free of charge for as long as they like. However, if you enjoy Tibia Gold, you may consider buying premium time to take Tibia coins even further.

By: DRG

DRG — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:58:08 +0000

Would it not be better for the USAF and the USA to build the first KC-767 tankers, while developing a new KC-777. The USAF could then, based on its needs have a mixed fleet of KC-767 & KC-777 at each base. So when a B52 or B1 needs a fillup they send up a KC-777, and when a F15 needs a fillup they send up the KC-767. We must also think of the cost to train pilots and mechanics for different aircraft types, so using boeings aicraft instead of a new KC-30 would be a huge cost saving in the long run.
I never hear anyone bring that hidden cost point up, I wonder why?

By: DRG

DRG — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:36:23 +0000

We should dual source the KC-767 to both Boeing & Northrop Grumman to build the new tankers based on Boeing 767, so the work is spread around to different USA vendors.
Northrop Grumman could also still build a plant in Mobile, Ala to build these planes so all of this $$ stays in the USA for a change.
The Boeing 767 should be the base plane for all US Air Force planes of this size, like AWACS, J-STARS. We must look at the real long term savings by having one type of aircraft that can be used in different roles.
a good web site to review more uses of 767
http://www.spyflight.co.uk/767%20mc2a.htm
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairmo/articles/20070131.aspx
If the USAF really needs a bigger Tanker then build half the fleet with KC-777 & the other half with KC-767.
We as Americans need to stop outsourcing all our manufacturing work offshore just to save a buck or two. In the long run it will cost the US tax payer more in all the hidden cost, like more unemployed workers lower skilled work force, while the rest of the work builds things we use to.
Just food for thought

By: GM CASSEL AMH1(AW) USN RET

GM CASSEL AMH1(AW) USN RET — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:17:29 +0000

Here’s how I see it.
Having worked in the aircraft manufacturing world for several years, I was treated to working with gypsies. That is contract employees who go where the work is. A number of them related to me that while doing heavy checks on airbus aircraft one thing came to light. They are flying corrosion traps. This is due to the use of non-clad aluminum where aluminum is used. They are not totally composite airframes. The phrase that vest said it was that upon pulling panels, one could bank on finding aluminum corrosion product. In rather significant amounts. How airbus manages to get a C of A on it’s aircraft is a mystery to me. It could be that airbuses are essentially consumable items.
My point on this is that I don’t want the aircrew who will be manning the new tanker(which ever) to be a problem, maintenance wise. Anyone who has been in Tailhook airplanes will understand.
Additionally, I live in Wichita, where the tanker wing is to be one that is going to receive the new aircraft. It won’t fit in the barn.