Re: Air Force Eyes Future Bomber 'Fly-Off'


"Ed Rasimus" <rasimusSPAMLESS@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ff2p12pedg3miuqmgt4cpiblh76vd291rv@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 17:13:22 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
<brooksvmi@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Ed Rasimus" <rasimusSPAMLESS@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:k5eo12tllp5sh1bsav3nmjhvb019oa90tt@xxxxxxxxxx

I contend that Lockheed got the contract because of their background
with the F-117 and the fact that Northrop was just rolling out the
B-2. A case of balancing the flow of defense dollars between the
players.

If decisions were indeed made upon such a pie-dividing basis, then the JSF
would have gone to Boeing. LMCO already had the F-22, and indeed was still
producing F-16's for both domestic and foreign use. Boeing had only the
remaining F/A-18E/F's for domestic consumption and whatever F-15K/S etc.
variants it can sell overseas. LMCO has the C-130J, Boeing the remaining
C-17's. But JSF went to LMCO anyway...

Brooks


All true. But, delve into your comments and consider all that has gone
before as well. The pie-division isn't the only factor. Politics plays
a lot in the process as well.

So, let's dissect:

LMCO had F-22--and numbers getting cut and cut and cut again. Hence,
small probable production run. Still producing F-16s--and JSF replaces
that in a very timely manner when full production comes. (And, let's
be sure to note what state that production line is in and how very
"blue" the Boeing home state is. Bush and Texas win, and then-Speaker
Delay is happy as well. Ain't nobody saying nice about the
administration on the western slope of the Cascades.)

Uhmmm...the Boeing fighter production center is in Missouri, which last I
knew was more "red" than "blue" when it comes to Presidential elections.


Boeing's F/A-18s are fine, but Boeing also is boltered by big body
production and there is certainly a highly visible level of
quid-pro-quo occuring with protection against Airbus.

But at the same time that this decision was coming out the 767 tanker deal
was going down in flames, so I don't necessarilly agree with you here.


And, LMCO might have C-130J, but I've got to liken that very long in
the tooth system and it's continued acquisitions to the F-111 days. No
one wants or needs it, but they still get ordered to keep those jobs
in place.

Funny, the USAF did an about face and bought into the J model for the active
component, and the users (both active and reserve) have been highly
complimentary in regards to its capabilities and their desire to get more of
them. I suspect that the AMC crowd would more likely buy into the theory
that the C-130J purchases have been heavily limited by the USAF's
overarching desire to keep buying F-22's.

Brooks


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Air Force Eyes Future Bomber Fly-Off
    ... If decisions were indeed made upon such a pie-dividing basis, then the JSF ... would have gone to Boeing. ... LMCO already had the F-22, ... that in a very timely manner when full production comes. ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: Angry Boeing supporters target McCain
    ... Where are these 'soon to be terminated' employees? ... they're still at work on the Boeing production line. ... in a factory yet to be built in an area serviced ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Jeez, i didnt know there was still a vought aircraft company left!
    ... Boeing plan to buy plant in South Carolina triggers commercial jet race ... plant of Vought Aircraft Industries was a much-needed, ... crucial stake in future commercial airplane production. ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Boeing to shut down C-17 production
    ... Boeing Co. said Friday it will begin shutting down production of its C-17 ... cargo plane, the last to be built in Southern California, because Congress ...
    (rec.aviation.military)