Comments on: ARH Death Hits Bell Hard

By: stephen russell

stephen russell — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:19:38 +0000

Bell can reuse the Idle plant for these or sell plant for these below:
Voc Tech Ed Training Center
Mall
Museum
Parking garage complex
X Plane Test Center
Venture Business Seedbank
GunRange
Aircraft Sim Trainer for pilots.
Copter Modification Center
Kit Copter Plant
Kit Plane & Car Plant
Auto Customizing center
Offices
VTOL Port for cityarea.
Bell Copters Musuem Center
TV & Movie Prod center
from 1 plant.

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:42:44 +0000

What? No opinion on the prospect of Bell Textron being forced to merge with or be absorbed by Sikorsky? This would create one big monopoly in the U.S. for helicopters,both military & civilian,& pretty much end the “capitalist” system concerning competition between two companies. Add the U.S. Government into the mix as “senior partner” who severely regulates both the building of,& shades of the former USSR,how many get built & what model each of helicopters.
The same will go for Northrop Grumman,Lockheed Martin,& Boeing as far as military & civilian aircraft goes. Again,the U.S. Government will be “senior partner” in this arrangement & severely regulate both the building & how many get built.
The automobile industry is already headed in this direction,& the U.S. Government(or rather the Central Bankers) has already taken over the banking & other financial industries. Capitalism is officially dead in the USA!!!!
You need to stop pissing & moaning over the “small stuff” & look at the BIG PICTURE.
What if the DOD simply cancelled the ARH to cause this “government controlled” merger to take place? The same can be said with other military programs & projects whose cancellation would put the companies responsible for building them to be at the brink of bankruptcy(& ripe for merger acquisition AND under Government Control.It would be like putting Bell Telephone back together again by causing the “forced” merger of the smaller companies created after its breakup).

By: hoverlover

hoverlover — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:00:24 +0000

Schedule and budget are issues in every DoD program and the initial cause is typically the DoD and their floating requirements.
Believe it or not this is actually for the better.

By: Hibby

Hibby — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 01:57:43 +0000

I know we all want programs to run smoothly, stay in the budget, and be on time. And we hate when exciting programs fall behind, run over budget, and seem to be bungled on a regular basis. People are especially critical of NASA, which I find slightly unfair, but none-the-less true.
The only way to keep this cycle from continueing is to punish companies by going in another direction or giving competitors a shot. But it sucks when workers lose their job because of it.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 23:46:54 +0000

Well this is what they get for not staying on schedule and within budget.

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:18:52 +0000

For those who think I'm nuts using the phrase "fascist economy," they need to look up specifically "fascist economy," ignore all of the "nationalist" BS,or "Right Wing" BS. Under the definition of "fascist economy," even the USSR practiced a "Fascist Economy."

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:08:29 +0000

What you are witnessing is the shrinking of the aviation industry into one big corporation,monopolies be damned. Bell will no doubt have to merge with Sikorsky in the U.S. to survive. You will also see the same thing with Northrop Grumman,Lockheed,& Boeing having to merge to survive. Of course all of these companies will have to partner with the U.S. Government,who will also have a major share in the stocks of these companies,& who will have CONTROLLING interest in the surviving companies. This will be a fascist economy,just like what you see in Japan & the European Union.

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:00:49 +0000

Here is a stupid question,why couldn’t they put the surveillance mast of the OH-58 Kiowa on to the body of the ARH helicopter? Why did it have to be a whole new surveillance podt under the body design? It seems like they only need to update the helicopter portion of the OH-58 Kiowa. What the hell,did the new helicopter itself not work? If it was just a problem with the pod,scrap the pod. The ARH was going to be armed just like the OH-58,there was no difference there,right? Wasn’t the ARH based on the Bell 417 commercially based helicopter? Why the hell couldn’t this version(or whatever version was used) be used to upgrade the OH-58 Kiowa?