Boeing Loses To Bombardier

It ain’t over till it’s over and it is over now.

Maybe Boeing (McDonnell- Douglas/MacAir) will sell the Canucks F/A-18’s now.

Cheers
 
Boeing in my opinion builds the best aircraft in the world, but their upper management are real a**holes.
 
X3 Skier said:
It ain’t over till it’s over and it is over now.

Maybe Boeing (McDonnell- Douglas/MacAir) will sell the Canucks F/A-18’s now.

Cheers
Click to expand...

I think Canada is buying older F-18s from Australia I believe. Stupid move on Boeings part to protest this. So Canada cancels the F-18 contract and I don't blame them. But then they protest everything that doesn't come their way, like the KC-46.
 
mscard88 said:
I think Canada is buying older F-18s from Australia I believe. Stupid move on Boeings part to protest this. So Canada cancels the F-18 contract and I don't blame them. But then they protest everything that doesn't come their way, like the KC-46.
Click to expand...

Canada has agreed to buy some older F/A-18’s from OZ. Thet need more so who knows.

As far as the KC-46, I was involved in that fiasco. The USAF really stepped on their tie in the first selection. Didn’t follow the rules, ignored the RFP outlined process, added criteria after the fact and generally ran a FUBAR Source Selection. The GAO, who I generally think is a bunch of less than competent people, had a really easy job upholding the protest.

The second go round allowed Boeing to win (?) and proceed to loose a ton of money with a grossly underpriced proposal and lousy execution.

Cheers
 
BTW, Boeing was considering protesting the B-21 decision but didn’t. I guess they decided to let Northrop loose the money this time.

Cheers
 
Good decision all round - regardless of who makes the planes, companies like the one I work for, have product on most major airframes flying today or coming into service. More choices for the airlines is also a good thing. The C Series is a very nice aircraft that will obviously have a place in the global marketplace. COMAC on the other hand, different story.
 
Hopefully better than the RJs designed for pygmy sized passengers.
 
Lockheed can't build a wing that won't need major work. C-130s seem to be constantly getting center section mods, the 141 had wing problems, the C5, and I won't mention the Electra. Plus they haven't built a airliner since the Tri Star killed them. Douglas, they knew how to build a wing.
 
X3 Skier said:
Like the C-17 that broke in the static test:eek:

Cheers
Click to expand...
Didn't say it was strong. Generally accepted the 8 wing was better than the 707. In any case Lockheed has cracking problems. I knew a guy that worked on the C5 production line, he had plenty of horror stories of repairs on new airplanes.
 
Paulie said:
Didn't say it was strong. Generally accepted the 8 wing was better than the 707. In any case Lockheed has cracking problems. I knew a guy that worked on the C5 production line, he had plenty of horror stories of repairs on new airplanes.
Click to expand...

Main reason was the USAF put the C-5 aircraft weight on contract and Lockheed cut a lot of corners to try and make spec weight leading to an underdesigned wing. In the C-17, weight wasn’t in the USAF Spec, Douglas just screwed up and the wing failed at 128% vs required 150% of limit load.

Cheers
 
X3 Skier said:
Main reason was the USAF put the C-5 aircraft weight on contract and Lockheed cut a lot of corners to try and make spec weight leading to an underdesigned wing. In the C-17, weight wasn’t in the USAF Spec, Douglas just screwed up and the wing failed at 128% vs required 150% of limit load.

Cheers
Click to expand...
Same thing happened when they tested the A380, got certified anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top