F-35 Engine? Pork or no Pork
Well here comes a budget showdown; two big corps building two redundant fighter engines which will mean business as usual wasting 450 million in taxpayer money! Or just one Corp building the engine;which means saving taxpayers 450 million. Sooooo... will the new conservatives (tea bag party) philosophy of cutting unnecessary spending prevail???
F-35 engine battle breaks out on GOP spending bill - U.S. news - Environment - msnbc.com
Originally Posted by zombie
You Mean like Zippys 790 Billion Stimulus ,Shovel ready Jobs LOL LOL LOL And MSNBC Ha Ha Ha Ha ROFLMAO Kidding RIGHT??
MSNBC Who in the Hell watches that Chit??
November 4 2008 "a date which will live in infamy". Jesus Saves
competition
What's better for business,Monopoly or competition? ? ?
What makes you feel safer, a single source or having back up? ? ?
How is it WASTING $450 million?
Really believe that having the market corned would not lead to exploitation?
Last edited by rschap1; 02-16-2011 at 06:21 AM.
All other fighters have had engine competitions.....until one is chosen, then it's over. The only reason to continue is to give welfare to a corp.....We are not building that god-awful boeing fighter, the competition is over, and has been for 5 years.
Monopolies are bad, but that's the way the system is set up, because of cost per unit and complexity of the A/C, and the spare parts supply system....
I have to say, this is where we find out if the TEA party is on the level....Fish or cut bait...
Strangley enough, I just today read a very good response from a former AF guy.
He said that competition has been the rule for awhile.
First if an engine has a problem, they have to decide whether to ground all planes til it's fixed.
Second, they found out that the contractors got competitive, delivered a better product, and at a better price, so the govt. actually saved some $. It still cost more to have 2 suppliers, but not twice as much.
His conclusion was it was a bad idea to give one defense contractor a monopoly on $100 billion plus for the next 30 yrs.
I'm still chuckling at being "poo-pooed" for straying off topic. Awesome.
Pork. Plain and simple.
I'll be damned ! The Obama Administration and the Tea Party led conservatives in the house actually chopped the unnecessary second engine from the budget!!!Saving the taxpayers millions!! House leader "porky" Boner got the bird on this
Still have to see what the senate does.
Cutts????
Waite untill NASA starts they're layoffs. Remember in the 70's, when there were NASA and aircraft egeneers working fliping burgers . History repeats it self.
NASA is really just an integrator/operator.
Cuts to NASA can affect a wide variety of locations across the United States, most the part making and development is done by private companies.
NASA, has been turned into a worthless Affirmative Action Jobs Bureaucracy,Who have killed 14 people through Stupidity,They need closed down and a complete restructuring with the old "Can Do" Mentality as the driving force.
November 4 2008 "a date which will live in infamy". Jesus Saves
Seems both sides decided a REDUNDANT engine was pork.
I agree.
sole sourcing can be dangerous, but if needed capitalism will insure a speedy replacement and plenty of parts should this be necessary
One engine- one part bought in bulk is the recipe for efficiency and speedy repairs, training and is ultimately much cheaper.
look to Southwest airlines - one plane, one repair guy certification, one set of interc hangeable parts.
Uncle Dave
I have always believed that, since the govt pays for a large proportion of the development of these military A/C and systems, if a corp' starts the old "Monopoly" thing, the govt should just take their(US Taxpayers) design across the street and have the other guy build it for them....do that just once and a lot of the govt contract screw-job mentality would go away.
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Digg This Thread