I like American made airplanes

I do. I can count on one hand how many times I've flown on a foreign made aircraft. I remember the first time, I was totaly uncomfortable, I didn't sleep. Now a days you can pick what flight and when and where it goes on the internet. I always look to see what model aircraft is scheduled. I always fly Boeing.

I've flown around the world in Lockheed, McDonald Douglas and Boeing made aircraft. I never felt uncomfortable. Even the first time I flew. I've flown with foreign crews, but on American aircraft. I never slept, but I was comfortable with the aircraft. Now a days I prefer to fly Alaska Airlines which has an all American fleet made by Boeing. I sleep very comfortably on Alaska Airlines.

I can't imagine being a young airman or soldier and getting on an aircraft designed in Europe. I don't believe I would have made a career in the Air Force if that was so in my time.

I belive yesterdays decision by the Air Force to award the contract of the KC40 to Northrop Grumman and Aerobus is a big, big mistake. Keep the jobs and the cash at home. Our economy is having enough issues without send ingthe airframe manufacturing over seas. Keep our airmen and soldiers safe and keep them in American made Aircraft.


Meggie said…
This is one topic that I must say I haven't given much thought....but I will! Great thing about blogging, you can be provoked into thinking or doing things that you wouldn't ordinarily. Gotta keep thinking...keeps us young! I'm sure you have good reasons to believe that American made aircraft are safer. Can you mention a few? I am no longer naive and think that Americans have the best medicine, cars, technology, etc. But I certainly believe in keeping jobs in the US. I know with your experience you have good reasons for your thinking...I'm curious to know your reasons.
Dave said…
No problem Meggie.
Let’s start with economic reasons.
• The initial program is valued at around $35 billion but could grow to $100 billion if the Air Force places additional orders.
• The contract would have supported 44,000 new and existing jobs at the company and suppliers in 40 states
• On cost, Boeing cited the $35 billion mentioned in last Friday's announcement as the full price of the 179 tankers (not counting operational support and maintenance costs) as evidence that Boeing was cheaper. It about life cycle cost and the 767 burns less fuel than A330.
• The European Union provides illegal subsidies to Airbus.
Now let’s due operational history
• There’s no more credible expert than the Boeing Co. with respect to the necessary maintenance of aircraft.

• Boeing is a single company. It uses common operating systems. They’ve been building tankers for 60 years. And they know how to work together (Boeing Commercial) and IDS.
• Look at the competition. Two companies that will be working together for the first time on a tanker, different systems, different languages, different cultures, across an ocean.
• For every 6 Boeing aircraft flying there is only 1 Airbus aircraft flying.

Should I continue?
Meggie said…
Nope! That'll do it! You got my vote!!!
RuthieJ said…
I heard that on the news last week too. With all the emphasis on keeping jobs in the US and bringing business back to the US, I can't even fathom why the decision was made to give this contract to Airbus (in addition to all the reasons you've listed)
I believe I yelled something obscene at my TV during that news report!