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

Boeing Awarded Two Contracts



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old January 7th 04, 04:49 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"fudog50" wrote in message
...
Today is Jan 6th 2003, and I am a Fleet Rep on active duty, a
customer. I am not living in the past, I live to meet tomorrows flight
schedule and do my best to overcome shortsighted programatic
philosophies and engineering failures to put a safe and reliable
product in the air for our crew to fly.


None of that changes the fact that most mil-specs for electronic components
are out of review and therefore no longer valid. There is no option outside
accepting COTS, as it has been the only game in town since 2000.

The F/A-18E is the first COTS airplane, in what way do you feel its
logistics are compromised?

Tarver I don't believe you
actually go to work and say you are gonna screw the customer. However,
because of your lack of ability to see a different viewpoint and
inexperience with actually working on any Navy Jet, or as an end-user
on any product, your basis for even commenting on this subject is a
fraud.


Well no, actually my design is part of the new Boeing 747 Amended type
certificate. Plus some guys called SPAWAR want my toys and so does NAVAIR
AW1. Perhaps you little bull**** flle rep job has ill prepared you to post
at ram, on this level.

to You are living in a totally different world totally digested
from the reality of a flightdeck or flightline. So like I said, we
have a difference of opinion, due to your background and job, just
leave it at that.


Let us agree that you are wrong, but have too much pride to deal with that
fact.

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:10:45 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"fudog50" wrote in message
.. .
Just more fuel for the fire Tarver, and backs up my firm belief that
all engineers should be locked up in rubber rooms at night. Or, better
yet, they should be made to go out to the front lines, or do a cruise
with a system of COTS and no support. Been there, done that. It sucks.


Interseting theory, but you are living in the past. COTS is all there

is,
Mil-spec components are no more. The RPL Model is mature at 20 years old
and it is the only basis for a Mil-Hbk 217 F calculation, as Mil-Secs for
components are expired. To pretend that Mil-Spec is a basis is fraud.




 




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 03:39 AM
More good news from Boeing noname Military Aviation 0 December 6th 03 02:50 AM
AOPA and ATC Privatization Chip Jones Instrument Flight Rules 139 November 12th 03 09:26 PM
Boeing shares rose as high as $38.90, up $2.86, in morning trade! Larry Dighera Military Aviation 0 October 29th 03 09:49 PM
The U.S. Air Force awarded BOEING CO. a $188.3 million new small-diameter precision-guided bomb contract Larry Dighera Military Aviation 3 October 28th 03 01:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.