Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: cmdr straker
try again look at KC-767. it covers it.

That's for the KC-767A Tanker Transport, an absolutely minimal conversion of the 767-200, with not much more than a boom added.

The KC-767AT is a whole new ball game

261 posted on 07/20/2008 10:04:11 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (In Cleveland: No one may kill a mouse in the streets without a hunting license)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies ]


To: Oztrich Boy

not by much it has alot of the same bells and whistles.
Not all but close. as for the eads it aint got NADA.

the KC-30 is not what its made up to be people.
It will cost more, as almost all of there programs are, it will be delayed as all of there programs are. and cannot do the job its suppose to.


263 posted on 07/20/2008 10:16:19 PM PDT by cmdr straker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies ]

To: Oztrich Boy

He’s not going to listen.

He tries to claim that the baseline KC-767 is the same as the KC-767AT as offered to the Air Force despite proof to the contrary. Hell, Boeing’s own mouthpiece even stated that the 767-200LRF/KC-767AT doesn’t even exist.

I’m still waiting for him to post links to those blogs he claims where tanker crews are stating that they will not fly the Northrop Grumman jet.


294 posted on 07/22/2008 9:40:56 AM PDT by 2CAVTrooper (Democrats: Supporting America's enemies since 1824)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson