A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Shouldn't the purchase of the F/A-22s wait until they have been tested?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 24th 04, 10:06 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

I mean Lockheed built DG's entry in the design competition.


Backpedaling again.


Nope.

USAF was so hot to let a fighter contract to Lockheed that they seleced a
design that could not even fly.


  #22  
Old February 24th 04, 10:23 PM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

USAF was so hot to let a fighter contract to Lockheed that they seleced a
design that could not even fly.


You're still telling us that the F-22 isn't flying.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #23  
Old February 25th 04, 12:09 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

USAF was so hot to let a fighter contract to Lockheed that they seleced

a
design that could not even fly.


You're still telling us that the F-22 isn't flying.


Put down the crack pipe, Irby.


  #24  
Old February 25th 04, 01:52 AM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Put down the crack pipe, Irby.


Best way to tell you've lost. Sixth-grade insults.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #25  
Old February 25th 04, 05:14 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Put down the crack pipe, Irby.


Best way to tell you've lost. Sixth-grade insults.


Does it upset you that I can post on your level, Irby?


  #26  
Old February 25th 04, 05:36 AM
Scott Ferrin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:10:54 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
Scott Ferrin wrote:

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:09:49 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

Georgia pork

Explain how the airforce wanting the aircraft is "pork".


Any airframe that Tarver can't make any money off of is, apparently,
evil.


The USAF was so hot to contract an a fighter from Lockheed that they
selected a design that would not even fly.



For once you have a good point but honestly I think it had more to do
with they knew Lockheed and Northrop could deliver stealth. GD's
didn't appear to be particularly stealthy with that huge vertical tail
and Boeing. . .well, was Boeing. If they'd wanted Pork I'd think
they'd have chosen GD's design and built theirs in Texas. Bush senior
was VP at the time of the down-selecting to two designs. However you
boil it down though why would the USAF be hot to buy from Lockheed
over the tried and proven McDonnell Douglas team?



  #27  
Old February 25th 04, 06:54 AM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Does it upset you that I can post on your level, Irby?


We'll let you know if you ever manage to.

On the other hand, we're still waiting for those strake photos.

Or references on mud bees in pitot tubes.

Or the name of someone who got arrested for taking photos of F-22s.

Or, well, *anything* to back up the stuff you post.

And we get to add "F-22s can't fly" and "Lockheed-Martin sold all of
their avionics businesses" to the ever-growing list of Tarverisms.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #28  
Old February 25th 04, 05:05 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Does it upset you that I can post on your level, Irby?


We'll let you know if you ever manage to.


It is difficult for me, but your childishness is a special case.


  #29  
Old February 25th 04, 05:07 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:10:54 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
Scott Ferrin wrote:

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:09:49 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

Georgia pork

Explain how the airforce wanting the aircraft is "pork".

Any airframe that Tarver can't make any money off of is, apparently,
evil.


The USAF was so hot to contract an a fighter from Lockheed that they
selected a design that would not even fly.



For once you have a good point but honestly I think it had more to do
with they knew Lockheed and Northrop could deliver stealth.


GD had the Ft Worth line.
Northrop had the B-2.
McDonnell had the F-15 and the F-18.

The Military Industrial complex needed another player.

GD's
didn't appear to be particularly stealthy with that huge vertical tail
and Boeing. . .well, was Boeing. If they'd wanted Pork I'd think
they'd have chosen GD's design and built theirs in Texas.


GD already had a fighter in production.

Bush senior
was VP at the time of the down-selecting to two designs. However you
boil it down though why would the USAF be hot to buy from Lockheed
over the tried and proven McDonnell Douglas team?


See above.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boeing Boondoggle Larry Dighera Military Aviation 77 September 15th 04 02:39 AM
EAA Hangar Purchase Kyle Boatright Home Built 1 March 30th 04 04:49 AM
For all to view - worth the wait! Kilroy Military Aviation 1 July 2nd 03 08:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.