Skip to comments.
Who should build our next light attack aircraft? (Brazil?)
Hot Air ^
| January 7, 2012
| Jazz Shaw
Posted on 01/07/2012 6:32:53 AM PST by bobsunshine
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-78 next last
The "King" has decided that Brazil is best suited for building our planes and delivering our oil. In his words "we will be your best customer"
To: bobsunshine
The Unions get screwed again by their leader.
2
posted on
01/07/2012 6:35:18 AM PST
by
bmwcyle
(I am ready to serve Jesus on Earth because the GOP failed again)
To: bobsunshine
Any country that either outsources or “mercenizes” its military and effectiveness is headed in the same direction as the Roman Empire.
3
posted on
01/07/2012 6:42:26 AM PST
by
apoliticalone
(Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
To: bobsunshine
4
posted on
01/07/2012 6:56:46 AM PST
by
Don Corleone
("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
Did You Know? The Current FReepathon Pays For The Current Quarters Expenses?
Now That You Do, Donate And Keep FR Running
5
posted on
01/07/2012 6:59:12 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
To: bobsunshine
We have to get this bunch out of our Government or we won’t have a country.
6
posted on
01/07/2012 7:02:33 AM PST
by
Venturer
To: bobsunshine
The Super Tucano is a proven design, while the AT-6 Texan II has yet to actually drop any ordnance.
7
posted on
01/07/2012 7:06:25 AM PST
by
Yo-Yo
(Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
To: Yo-Yo
“the AT-6 Texan II has yet to actually drop any ordnance.”
Yeah those prop airplanes are a new fangled contraption, we’d be far better off trusting our military development with a country that has open anti-american tendencies.
8
posted on
01/07/2012 7:10:22 AM PST
by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
To: bobsunshine
Answers are in order. Just why is Hawker Beechcraft out and Embraer in? inquiring minds want to know. The American people ought to know. Taxpayers should know. In the end, we better know, because there can be no good reason. NONE!
9
posted on
01/07/2012 7:10:50 AM PST
by
wita
To: Yo-Yo
All designs are new at some time. If we only accepted proven designs we would not have the best equipment in inventory. I don’t want our troops fighting with last years out dated equipment.
10
posted on
01/07/2012 7:11:59 AM PST
by
jimpick
To: wita
———Just why is Hawker Beechcraft out and Embraer in?-——
Perhaps Embraer builds a better product.
Consider Hawker, not just Beechcraft. Perhaps Hawker diluted the product Beech quality beyond the point of military acceptability.
11
posted on
01/07/2012 7:13:34 AM PST
by
bert
(K.E. N.P. +12 ..... Crucifixion is coming)
To: Yo-Yo
Should they have said that about the P-51?
12
posted on
01/07/2012 7:14:45 AM PST
by
Carry_Okie
(The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
To: bobsunshine
To: bobsunshine
You can bet many parts will be supplied by the Chinese.
14
posted on
01/07/2012 7:15:18 AM PST
by
kenmcg
(How)
To: bobsunshine
Ideally the plane would be built in the US. I'm no aviation expert, but the design and capabilities of the Super Tucano certainly do seem better suited to the Light Air Support mission:
To: ProtectOurFreedom
And the A-29 / Super Tucano would be built in the US in Jacksonville, FL using parts from 70 US suppliers in 21 states:
To: wita
Answers are in order. Just why is Hawker Beechcraft out and Embraer in? inquiring minds want to know. Because Embraer had a combat-proven product ready for delivery. Hawker Beechcraft has promiseware.
An examination, not from Hawker-Beechcraft fluffers
LAARA: Beechcraft vs. Embraer
17
posted on
01/07/2012 7:26:50 AM PST
by
Oztrich Boy
(Whatever happened to that Amy Summerland sailing chick?)
To: bobsunshine
I wonder how much of Embraer George Soros owns?
18
posted on
01/07/2012 7:29:18 AM PST
by
Gritty
(Much of the developed world has ruptured the compact between past, present and future-Mark Steyn)
To: bobsunshine
...previously considered a front-runner in the .... Just goes to show that when it comes to lies both sides are adept. The AT-6 was NEVER considered a forerunner. It hadn't (and still has not) even reached a level where it could match capabilities the Super Tucano had proven years before. The Super Tucano was built ground up to be a light-attack COIN aircraft, while the AT-6 was being modified to try and be one. If one wants to make a case for the AT-6 one can go ahead and use the 'Made in America' - however an argument cannot be made based on capabilities.
19
posted on
01/07/2012 7:31:18 AM PST
by
spetznaz
(Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
To: driftdiver
Yeah those prop airplanes are a new fangled contraption, wed be far better off trusting our military development with a country that has open anti-american tendencies. We're buying a handful of these long-loiter, low speed aircraft, and it makes much more economic sense to buy off the shelf at a guaranteed price per copy than to sink unknown billions in a new development program for such a low rate of production.
We're not talking primary defense like the F-22 or F-35, but for what it's worth both of those programs were/are years behind schedule and hundreds of billions over projected budget.
20
posted on
01/07/2012 7:33:17 AM PST
by
Yo-Yo
(Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-78 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson