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

To: pepperdog

Thougths (in no particular order):

1. The USAF should choose the aircraft that will best meet their needs.

2. The USAF has no rigorous method for determining which aircraft that will best meet their needs.

3. This is not a jobs program.

4. The process has a tainted history of fraud on the part of contractors and sloppiness on the part of the USAF\government which will continue to haunt every decision forward.

5. Whoever looses, will appeal.

6. The USAF desperately needs new tankers.


15 posted on 02/24/2011 12:01:36 PM PST by TankerKC (Confucius say, he who rushes to vote on bill before reading, might forget severability clause.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: TankerKC
7. Proofread before you post.
17 posted on 02/24/2011 12:05:14 PM PST by TankerKC (Confucius say, he who rushes to vote on bill before reading, might forget severability clause.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: TankerKC

Thought

1a. And ensure the contractor they select will provide sufficient engineering data, provisioning, training, etc. so the aircraft can be totally supported by military/civilian personnel working for the DOD in the USA and overseas and spares can be procured from the most economical sources. Buying the aircraft is not the only thing, maintaining is quite something else.

Question 3a...why, if the taxpayers are footing the bill shouldn’t they get the jobs?


20 posted on 02/24/2011 1:21:41 PM PST by pepperdog (Why are Democrats Afraid of a Voter ID Law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | 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