% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

The Boeing Company Message Board

  • h_iamiam1 h_iamiam1 May 10, 2007 3:36 PM Flag

    Did Boeing cheat on the CSAR deployability test

    Its a near certainty as it is SOP with them. On the 3 hour test to build up for flight readiness after transport, Boeing finished in 2:58 hrs, except it wasn't really ready, it was missing parts etc., not flight ready. Sec. Wynne's team said oh thats ok it doesn't really matter.

    >>>"A nugget, hidden deep in a Government Accountability Office (GAO) document recently unsealed, reveals that Boeing's HH-47 Chinook helicopter, the winner of last November's Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR-X; pronounced "see-sar-ex") helicopter competition worth $15 billion, may not have truly met a key requirement--further calling into question Boeing's victory."<<< goes on

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I often wonder why you challange every BA contract and hold all executives out as theives and crooks and also call the GAO's decisions flawed as well as the customers evaluations.
      You sound like one sad individual with no life. You seem to have a personal Jehad or something against this industry. Do us all all a favor and get help before we hear about you in the news.

      • 3 Replies to stillinshock
      • stillinshock, You seem to invent things and have some kind of Jehad yourself. Its true that I know Boeing exec's as liars cheats and thevies, if that bothers you alas, they are liars cheats and thevies. Can't say it if it isn't so, if it bothers you too much put it on ignore. As for in the news, it is in the news on a regular basis, Boeing ethics and legal lapses. The things they do to employees and the Washington State public and others are worse then what I have said. I hope I cause some awareness. Reevaluate your motives.

      • I second your concerns.

        I originally took exception to the plethora of unfounded comments and accusations made by this poster, however, now I'm convinced that these claims are actually a plea for attention and express a need for some sort of help.

        The disjointed connections and improbable conclusions that they present indicate deep-rooted pain and anger.

        Unfortunately, they will not find much help on an internet message board.

      • Stillinshock now that you're pointed out iamiamiams short comings, I have never seen you post anything critical of Boeing. At least iamiamiam gave a web page to back up his claims. Why don't you debate the items he just put forth. I also heard that Boeing had alot of problems shoehorning the CH-47 into a C-17. Are you saying that is not a critical shortcoming? Is it Boeing and the Airforce attitude that let's give the contract to Boeing and we'll worry about the details later? That sounds like the A-12 fiasco and many other huge cost overrun contracts. "Let's get the contract first and then we'll worry about it". A sad state of affairs in the procurement process! Give credit to John McCain for digging into this. I truly believe that if Boeing loses the tanker deal, this little contract for some search and rescue helicopters and the attitude of those involved will have played a major role in Boeing not getting it.

    • Good post iamiam. Everybody please repeat after me...get ready........"This competition smells like shit"......ahhh!! the fragrance!!!........ibcnu2day6 are you out there!

    • A previous poster said that transportability deficiency that Sikorsky and Lockheed pointed out about the HH-47 was a "red herring". I now know who the "red herring" is.

133.47-0.06(-0.04%)Jul 22 4:02 PMEDT