Skip to comments.
Boeing wins U.S. Navy airplane deal
http://money.cnn.com/2004/06/14/news/fortune500/boeing_contract.reut/ ^
| June 14, 2004
| cnn money
Posted on 06/14/2004 2:07:09 PM PDT by avg_freeper
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-132 next last
Lockheed was the expected winner, so this is a surprise.
To: avg_freeper
Chicago-based Boeing
That still sounds weird.
To: avg_freeper
Boeing really needs the work, but a 737 based maritime patrol aircraft is just stupid. Too fast, too high, with no loiter time on station. When you are using planes to track ships, low and slow is the way to go...
3
posted on
06/14/2004 2:09:59 PM PDT
by
bondjamesbond
(Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown)
To: avg_freeper
To: A.A. Cunningham
Not a lot of happiness here in Marietta.
5
posted on
06/14/2004 2:13:10 PM PDT
by
avg_freeper
(Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
To: avg_freeper
Boeing was one of the few stocks in the green today.
6
posted on
06/14/2004 2:13:57 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Destroy the dark; restore the light)
To: avg_freeper
And there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth....
Since Lockheed has done almost every other aircraft manufacturer dirty at one time or another, it's fun to see them get the dirty end of the stick for a change.
(Not that I expect them to roll over on this. They may fight nasty, but they're tenacious.)
7
posted on
06/14/2004 2:15:29 PM PDT
by
Ronin
(We are in a war. The enemy is Islam. It's time we stopped pretending otherwise.)
To: bondjamesbond; Long Cut
When SURTASS LFA is perfectly capable of pinpointing the subs, then you really don't need that much loiter time... in that case, speed become more important.
8
posted on
06/14/2004 2:16:16 PM PDT
by
hchutch
("Go ahead. Leave early and beat the traffic. The Milwaukee Brewers dare you." - MLB.com 5/11/04)
To: bondjamesbond
The 37 is a great plane, but with 4000 hrs in P-3's, mostly in the vast western pacific, I say give me 4 engines baby! Get 1500 miles out in westpac in a 737 and lose an engine and you're gonna have a looooong flight home!
9
posted on
06/14/2004 2:16:18 PM PDT
by
LDO4CNO
To: Long Cut
10
posted on
06/14/2004 2:20:48 PM PDT
by
Modernman
("I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members" -Groucho Marx)
To: LDO4CNO
Yup! I still got very interested when we lost 1 of 4 way out there.
To: LDO4CNO
Why not buy updated versions of the P-3? I can't see any advantage in using jets to patrol for submarines.
12
posted on
06/14/2004 2:22:54 PM PDT
by
Paleo Conservative
(Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
To: Ronin
Since Lockheed has done almost every other aircraft manufacturer dirty at one time or another, it's fun to see them get the dirty end of the stick for a change. Oh, I think that Boeing defiantly has Locheed beat in that department. Do you remember the recent business about Boeing getting employees to spirit away technical documentation from Lockheed? Or when they were making big hiring promises to pentagon procurement people.
Boeing was fined heavily over the past year for these shenanigans but I guess they're being rewarded now.
13
posted on
06/14/2004 2:23:04 PM PDT
by
avg_freeper
(Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
To: avg_freeper
What happens when the people making the decision have never actually been aboard a military aircraft. This will bite the Navy big-time.
pabianice (3,000 hours in P-3s)
To: avg_freeper
the spell checker thought that defiantly sounded good but I actually meant definitely
15
posted on
06/14/2004 2:28:56 PM PDT
by
avg_freeper
(Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
To: Paleo Conservative
I can't see any advantage in using jets to patrol for submarines. Especially a two-engine jobby..... There has to be a technical advantage of some sort. I know that the later 737 models are pretty efficient, and they can easily operate on one engine, so I'm guessing they either got the Navy to buy off on reduced mission duration, or showed a cost advantage (more planes but lower out-year costs), or they've been able to achieve a good mission duration.
It'd be interesting to see how the Navy handled that part of the bid.
16
posted on
06/14/2004 2:32:03 PM PDT
by
r9etb
To: Steve_Seattle
Way to go, Linda Daschle!
To: SirChas
18
posted on
06/14/2004 2:36:10 PM PDT
by
mad puppy
(May God continue to bless Ron and Nancy.)
To: New Zealander; KiaKaha
,,, P3 replacement ping
To: avg_freeper
20
posted on
06/14/2004 2:45:29 PM PDT
by
finnman69
(hOcum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-132 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson