Pepper99

2 Comments

    • In Defense of Northrup-Grumman's USAF Contract Win [view article]
      The "For America" writer is mis-informed about Airbus fly-by-wire aircraft. The system can certainly be overridden by the pilot - but you would only do that in extreme circumstances that this pilot cannot imagine.

      Another thought about the tanker contract: Why would you want your sons or daughters,your grandchildren and great-grandchildren to be saddled with an airplane, the B767, that no commercial airline in the world wants to buy?
      Remember the B767 was designed as an answer to the Airbus A300 & A310, which were the first twin-engine wide body aircraft.
      The A330 was an answer to the B767.
      The B787 is an answer to the A330. That's the plane Boeing should have offered, instead of an out-dated model.
      Mar 12 10:49 PM
    • In Defense of Northrup-Grumman's USAF Contract Win [view article]
      Great piece. It reminded me of a seeming contradiction in logic by Boeing politicians, who argue that foreign government subsidies hurt Boeing’s ability to compete, including on the tanker contract. Did your readers know that Boeing in fact benefits from foreign government subsidies? It is a fact that Boeing awarded the extremely lucrative contract for the wings and other components on the 787 Dreamliner to Japanese aerospace companies, which benefited from low interest government loans ($1.5 billion, according to article from Seattle Times, May 2005). These gov’t subsidy supported companies successfully underbid U.S. companies, including Boeing, for the contracts, sending the work offshore.
      This begs the question: Wh, if foreign subsidies are so terrible, hasn’t our government filed a WTO complaint against Japan for providing subsidies? Could it be because it is Boeing who benefits from them?
      Maybe this should be classified under “BELIEVE IT OR NOT! Foreign government subsidies… (surprise)… to Boeing! “
      Mar 12 10:37 PM
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor