The lost Boeing contract

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

You, and everyone else, knows I work for Boeing Helicopter, so what?

No I did not know that. If I had read it, I probably would have ignored or forgotten it as irrelevant. However Boeing bias in your posts were so egregious to suspect you either worked for Boeing or for a Boeing contractor.

Meanwhile this still does not change the fact stated by numerous third parties also known for their honesty. The Boeing 767 tanker was corporate welfare in 2003 when outright fraud and corruption was being used to sell it to the Air Force. That same 767 tanker is the inferior choice today. Boeing did not propose the obviously competitive 777 tanker. Boeing could have proposed three different planes. But Boeing chose to only offer the same inferior tanker also proposed in 2003 to protect their dying 767 assembly line. Corporate welfare.

Now we will learn who in Congress is so corrupt as to help Boeing; force a pathetically inferior plane on the Air Force. Meanwhile, if assuming emotion, well, Boeing has always been one of my favorite companies. The 757/767 was always a preferred plane if I had the option. That ‘emotion’ (preference) does not bias my decision based in logic. It may be one of my favorite companies. But Boeing here is wrong.

First, why would the United States Air Force skew a contract to favor a foreign nation's plane (unless Boeing was so corrupt at to be punished by the Air Force).

Second, why can't Boeing make public the entire public statement? Why is it too secret (public redacted version) to trust publically with the entire Cellar? I appreciate the offer of that full statement. But if a full 2.5 Mb version has confidentially issues, then I would prefer neither you nor I to be subject of any Boeing 'problems'.

I don't know why an EE Times link gets perverted. I tried again and it just does not work right. Problem may be due to ‘java’ in the link. Editorial is at www.eetimes.com published 14 Mar 2008.