"KC-46: Too Crucial To Fail" Topic
3 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench Article Here's Suzi - before and after...
Featured Profile Article
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
| Tango01 | 14 Sep 2019 3:57 p.m. PST |
"The Air Force and Congress are simply sucking up the latest calamity to befall the KC-46 tanker, with representatives on both sides of Capitol Hill — and the prospective new Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett — expressing support for the beleaguered program. "There is no other option at this point," explains Todd Harrison, the director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). "The Air Force needs new tankers, and Boeing is the only one making them."…"
Main page
link
Amicalement
Armand
|
| vichussar | 22 Sep 2019 5:37 a.m. PST |
The biggest problem is that governments won't use or enforce
"Default Clauses" forcing the supplier, in this case Boeing, to wear the costs of the changes or delays in fulfilling the contract.
If it was a private sector company making the purchase, they would be penalizing Boeing left right and center for the stupid errors being made in construction and design.
It's 2019 there is no excuse for a company like Boeing to be so lax in its work and think the taxpayer dollars will cover it |
| Tango01 | 25 Sep 2019 12:26 p.m. PST |
Thanks!.
Amicalement
Armand
|
|
added anti-tank elements to his NATO forces in WWIII: Team Yankee.
