I mis-spoke when I said EADS was an American company.
I meant to say "EADS is partnered up with an American company Northrop, "a great American company" to quote you.
What foreign countries/companies is Boeing partnered up with to co-produce the 767?
Who knows if they'll even build the 767 for that job, they may end up building the 777 and they're partnered up with Japan on that plane, at least.
I guess you partner up with whoever you can.
Boeing partnered up with the devil a few years ago and they got caught, big time, to the tune of maybe hundreds of millions of $$$$in fines.
Why should this contract be front loaded with costs to pay Boeing's fines, it'll be expensive enough as it is.
Object as you wish on the rudder issue, but the plain truth is that it was designed on the cheap against advice, it killed a number of passengers, and Boeing hid the facts in order to avoid legal fees. It was dishonest, and totally unethical.
As to the V-22, I am sorry for any personal loss you may have had in its development. This aircraft has been over 20 years in development trying to make it fly. The military bought it to bail out the builders, they are now trying to figure out what it can be used for. Note it was not submitted for the CSAR contract, even though that was the claim for its development. Marines have enough to worry about when entering or leaving a hot zone without the addition worry if the vehicle is going to kill them, or if because of its operation shortfalls they are a better target. >>>>"Record is not worse than the Harrier or others I could mention".<<<< I not sure that can be taken as a recommedation, in any case the Harrier is not landing and taking off in the hot zone with a load of Marines. The V-22 may someday have a use, but at present its a experimental toy and potentially a marine killer. Get over the sentiment.
Take issue with not owning up to the ruddder problem and we will be at odds no matter what you think. The V-22 was my last project before I retired. It was new tech and softwear was changing every day as we developed it. Every flight we found new challanges and addressed them. Every life lost was a personl friend and caused all of us a lot of pain in flight test. We knew the risks and the potential this new tech held for our military and the lives it would eventually save. Ask the customer what they think now. Record is not worse than the Harrier or others I could mention. I've said too much and will not argue with you any more.
Lets not get choked up here thinking about those times past. Engineering has had some good days there, some bad days. The manufacturing mgr's are in a word dirt bags that try their best to push crap out the door, they have also done everything they could to get rid of the Quality dept. About that Rudder defect they knew all along what the problem was but wouldn't own up to save lives, but kept quiet to save libility bucks. Then quietly reworked the rudders. Why did they rework the rudders? How about the V-22 and their safety record and concerns? Been there saw it.
Hey little buzzard boy. As a stock holder I think you should report to your supervisor for supervision. Quit wasting time I this board saying things you know nothing about. Quit being a load on your coworkers.
<<<I see that fleetbuzzard boy taz is back. Wonder what they paid that some 600M fine for as part of the deal they could keep hidden the details and who was doing what and the rest would not have to spend time in the slammer? They are a bunch of crooks, why are you defending them? >>>
Pointing out that your slanders are unsubstantiated does not equate to defending anybody, (you're simply spawning yet another unfounded accusation). If you have proof of any current exec's wrong-doing, then, by all means, present it. But you have no evidence--you're a one-trick-pony, and that trick is to accuse, accuse, accuse without any substance. Your grasp on reality is nearly non-existent, (as many have pointed out here).
As for your ham-handed references to fleebuzz--sorry, wrong again. Face it, the voices in your head are lying to you and making you look foolish to the rest of us.
Your out of your league here and too pathetic to know it--but your rants do have some entertainment value, in a pitiable sort of way.
So now that I've wound you up like a little toy, let's see you bounce around spewing accusation upon accusation in all directions......go on, entertain me Fool.
The engineering at Ba is second to none. Managers of the business units and communications and finance are not an area where I can say I have personal experience.
As for the product line, most are top performers and the market has proven that. The rudder problem could never be substantiated even through extensive testing. Since we could never duplicate the suspected problem it remains a sad chapter in that aircrats history. I will say here and always have, that BA never put an airplane in service where the flying public was at risk. And that carried over to flight testing where the envelope was always expanded. Anyone with a question or doubt about any testing, and that airplane sat on the ground until all were satisfied. Didn't matter if it were a pilot or engineer or support folks like myself. Sorry, have to take issue with your position.
I see that fleetbuzzard boy taz is back. Wonder what they paid that some 600M fine for as part of the deal they could keep hidden the details and who was doing what and the rest would not have to spend time in the slammer? They are a bunch of crooks, why are you defending them?
<<<<Well may I weigh in here on that. Which of the exec's or BOD's do you think is not a liar cheat and thief? >>>>
If you have proof of any current Exec's misdeeds, (other than in your own mind), then show it.
Otherwise, STFU, nobody's listening to your tawdry, unsubstantiated rants.
That fine. Nobody actually saw them write a check. What financial instrument did they use? I suspect they paid with a wink and a nod and take it of the ticket when we start building tankers. Whats the bet that its hasn't been paid.
Boy, do you have a one way memory JERK. Your in bed with the biggest bribers in the industry. Its the European money your execs are after and whinning over the rules for the tanker. You can't tell me that climbing into bed with those crooked back door money handlers isn't what attracted your top Execs to Airbus in the first place. You folks taking the high road here is crap. Your sleeping with dogs and you have fleas JERK. Wake up and smell the coffee. We cleaned house and hired the best to do it. It will be your trun soon enough.