Maybe Boeing ought to get in on the C-series, Boeing-it-up a bit and then have most of it built in Canada and the remainder in Renton? There was talk a while ago about Airbus trying to get Embraer and ATR to combine efforts on a large turboprop under an Airbus umbrella.

It would suprise me if they weren't already involved. Sell some design and logistics expertise as they become the outsource provider and let other companies sell the scoter trash while they focus on that sweet, sweet pentagon and Arab/Asia market widebody.

I think Boeing is involved in the Russian RJ, and probably several others as well.

It's all fun and games until Airbus wins the tanker award, then maybe Boeing builds a NB?

I think they will win the tanker award but we'll see. In any case, who cares about scooter trash single isle airliners when every time we nationbuild some tin pot dictator they make more slush money from the taxpayer in replaced munitions inventory not to mention future new defense contracts and of course subsidized foreign widebodies.

They will build one eventually regardless. But they will drag their heels on it and even when its ready for market, according to Boeing themselves, it will be lucky to match the 320 NEO's fuel numbers and almost certainlly not price and absolutely without significant cockpit commonality. Oh, and bonus, new fleet type versus Airbus's seamless transition for most carriers.

Same effieciency, same or greater price, years later to market, significantly less commonality and all the hassles of ramping up a version 1.0 dash 100 A model airplane. Plus it wouldn't suprise me if they dumbed it down trying to bait the hook for SWA anyway.

Maybe it will have the forever pressure hull though, but the advantages of that won't be seen for decades (read: no current CEO/CFO will care) and in any case that won't nearly cancel out its inherent disadvantages anyway for most operators. Unless they pull a rabit out of their hat with some phenominal lifting body cold fusion zero carbon footprint masterpiece, they will be a minor player going forward in the narrowbody market, which IMO is fine with them.

I think Boeing had some consulting on the E170/190.

Like the A400?

Boeing already won the tanker award, announced about 2 weeks ago.

And this from AFA:



Too-Low Flyover Draws Referee's Flag: Maj. XXXXXX, a 25th Flying Training Squadron pilot at Vance, AFB, Okla., has received nonjudicial punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for violating altitude and speed restrictions when he led a four-ship of T-38s that overflew a University of Iowa football game in Iowa City last November. Kopacek is separating from the Air Force of his own accord, according to a release Wednesday from Vance's 71st Flying Training Wing. "While I understand that fans attending the game enjoyed the flyover, rules are in place to ensure everyone's safety," said Col. Russell Mack, 71st FTW commander. He added, "[T]his was a serious breach of flight discipline and it was necessary to take administrative action." Among the violations, the wing's command-directed investigation found that the pilots flew only 16 feet above the stadium's press box when the minimum height difference for a flyover is supposed to be 1,000 feet.

Practice, practice, practice.

I recently read "The Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell. He looks at people that were considered geniuses in their field, and finds (surprise, surprise) that they are not successful because of raw talent alone, but also because of practice, practice, practice. In fact, interestingly enough, 10,000 hours seems to be the magic number before people become true experts. This was true for Bill gates, Mozart, etc.

So you've got 10,000 hours of masterdebating to log before you can be considered a true master debater, the same way Gates is a master in his field. But you have to be your own person, because it's certainly OK to look to Gates as an example in general terms, but it's not OK to think about Gates as you masterdebate.

Gloopy, very interesting post.

Sink, yours too. I'll tell my wife that my time on the computer has tremendous master debating benefits.

I wouldn't do that: you'd be conceding some ground for no gains of your own. Anyone that's ever argued with their wife knows what skilled master debaters they are, and all of us suspect they practice masterdebating as much as we do. But you can never get one to admit that she masterdebates. So don't concede somethong she wouldn't ever volunteer, and keeep your masterdebating private, until your skills are such that you can bring it up from a position of strength.

Good luck.