Trump and Boeing Air Force One
12-06-2016, 06:38 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
Posts: 1,537
Put it this way...
The USS Gerald R. Ford, America's newest aircraft carrier, is coming in at approx. $12 billion, plus another $4b in R&D. Call it $16 billion altogether.
If you want to believe liberal hysteria and outrage here you have to be stupid AND gullible enough to believe that 2 new AF1s are worth 1/4th of the cost of the USA's newest aircraft carrier...
2 planes = 1 carrier
...which helps explain why no liberal has had the intelligence (much less the guts) to call the Obama administration out for more than doubling the nation's debt in just 8 years by spending MORE than ALL the combined administrations in US history prior to his.
Needless to say, these are the same idiotic rocket-scientists who voters have sent back to the political fringe, where they come from to begin with.
The USS Gerald R. Ford, America's newest aircraft carrier, is coming in at approx. $12 billion, plus another $4b in R&D. Call it $16 billion altogether.
If you want to believe liberal hysteria and outrage here you have to be stupid AND gullible enough to believe that 2 new AF1s are worth 1/4th of the cost of the USA's newest aircraft carrier...
2 planes = 1 carrier
...which helps explain why no liberal has had the intelligence (much less the guts) to call the Obama administration out for more than doubling the nation's debt in just 8 years by spending MORE than ALL the combined administrations in US history prior to his.
Needless to say, these are the same idiotic rocket-scientists who voters have sent back to the political fringe, where they come from to begin with.
12-06-2016, 06:46 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,803
Originally Posted by SayAlt
Put it this way...
The USS Gerald R. Ford, America's newest aircraft carrier, is coming in at approx. $12 billion, plus another $4b in R&D. Call it $16 billion altogether.
If you want to believe liberal hysteria and outrage here you have to be stupid AND gullible enough to believe that 2 new AF1s are worth 1/4th of the cost of the USA's newest aircraft carrier...
2 planes = 1 carrier
...which helps explain why no liberal has had the intelligence (much less the guts) to call the Obama administration out for more than doubling the nation's debt in just 8 years by spending MORE than ALL the combined administrations in US history prior to his.
Needless to say, these are the same idiotic rocket-scientists who voters have sent back to the political fringe, where they come from to begin with.
The USS Gerald R. Ford, America's newest aircraft carrier, is coming in at approx. $12 billion, plus another $4b in R&D. Call it $16 billion altogether.
If you want to believe liberal hysteria and outrage here you have to be stupid AND gullible enough to believe that 2 new AF1s are worth 1/4th of the cost of the USA's newest aircraft carrier...
2 planes = 1 carrier
...which helps explain why no liberal has had the intelligence (much less the guts) to call the Obama administration out for more than doubling the nation's debt in just 8 years by spending MORE than ALL the combined administrations in US history prior to his.
Needless to say, these are the same idiotic rocket-scientists who voters have sent back to the political fringe, where they come from to begin with.
Keep going! Your frothy nonsense is pure entertainment gold!
12-06-2016, 07:04 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,803
Originally Posted by SayAlt
lulz
Just curious...what part do you consider nonsense?
Just curious...what part do you consider nonsense?
Try this; buy 2 747-800's on the cheap and have the Air Force convert them. Which procurement do you suppose will cost more?
If one-offs weren't costed primarily on R&D expense we'd all be driving Formula One cars to work.
Carry on with your rants.
12-06-2016, 07:20 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 936
Originally Posted by WesternSkies
If only he wasn't an exaggerator.
I really believe him this time.
I really believe him this time.
12-07-2016, 02:46 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
Posts: 1,537
Originally Posted by awax
You side stepping R&D costs.
Try this; buy 2 747-800's on the cheap and have the Air Force convert them. Which procurement do you suppose will cost more?
If one-offs weren't costed primarily on R&D expense we'd all be driving Formula One cars to work.
Carry on with your rants.
Try this; buy 2 747-800's on the cheap and have the Air Force convert them. Which procurement do you suppose will cost more?
If one-offs weren't costed primarily on R&D expense we'd all be driving Formula One cars to work.
Carry on with your rants.
You are side-stepping rational argument, not frothy nonsense.
Try this; we're still using B-52s , the last of which was produced in 1962! They just keep getting the electronics upgrades they need and are already shielded for nuclear blasts, etc. Oh yeah, they are Boeing products, too.
AF1 R&D.....for what, exactly? What needs to be researched and developed for AF1 that hasn't been already R&D'd for an airplane that has already been developed and is in production?
More importantly, explain to us how Boeing isn't using this to add a lot of cream and sugar to their bottom line.
Oh and btw.....Obama did this same thing with Sikorsky helicopters when he was the incoming POTUS. In an almost identical circumstance, there was already a gov't contract with Sikorsky for new presidential helicopters that Obama thought was too expensive (ironic in several ways).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
