I disagree. Yes, bribes, in all its forms, will always be a part of that type of business. However: The U.S. market for every form of aircraft, has been off-limits for decades. From the General Electric Lighting, to date. There has been no point in any aircraft manufacture, outside the U.S., to attempt the 'out bit' for U.S. contracts; military or otherwise.
General / Off-Topic Overview and an interesting insight into Boeing 737MAX issues
- Thread starter Chris Simon
- Start date
Not entirely true: there have been a few instances where foreign designs have got through. The US carrier trainer T-45 Goshawk for example is a modified Bae Hawk trainer, the US Marines use a modified Harrier, NASA used (and still does) EE Canberras. The F35 uses extensive amounts of Bae technology in its manufacture, and draws a lot of tech from the only fly by wire Harrier (VAAC Harrier)
It was only through lobbying (and stupidity to begin with) the US air force got Boeing to drop Airbus for its tanker fleet, as well as Augusta Westland almost netting the Marine One with the AW 101. Boeing is also paranoid enough to try and get different classes they don't even build scrapped- Bombardier as an example.
Last edited:
Not quite true.
The Harrier jump jet came out in the late 60s and the Americans, said it was pointless. Not fast enough, but then spent the next 50 years, trying to build their own one. Then when they agreed to 'buy it', with conditions, they found that their pilots had major issues flying it and so once again, tried to dismiss it as a waste of time and money. So the brits, made what is basically, an auto-docking system. As you say, now they have the F35, which on the drawing board and for the funding, plus using 'our special relationship' to get to understand and use the technology. This was meant to be a Harrier plus. VTO with a really fast top speed, I am not sure how many decades work and how much funding the F35 has had put into it, but as you say. Now they have a number of different models, a fast runway required one and a very very expensive Harrier.
?
The Americans were involved right from the start (with W.Germany) with a tripartite evaluation agreement in the early 60's testing the Kestrel (what the Harrier was based on).
The Americans wanted to build them in America via McDonnell Douglas partnering with Hawker Siddeley but in the end it was cheaper to build them in the UK as the AV-8 (and improvements from the AV-8 went back into later Harrier marks).
America had tried long before with things like the Convair Pogo but gave up. NATO in the late 50s sent out a requirement and this is where the Harrier came from (via the Kestrel).
Originally the Harrier had a supersonic variant, the P.1154- but for various reasons was ditched. It was ironic because (like the F-35 now) it was found a supersonic Harrier would have melted deck plates and tarmac, limiting its usefulness (the Harrier blowing cooler exhaust).
On one copy- see the video.
The UK is the only level 1 partner in the F-35 consortium, mainly because the UK wants a Harrier replacement (along with the US Marines)- the B variant will do this.
Boeing received no orders in January, for the first time since 1962.
The American manufacturer continues its crossing of the desert, largely weakened by the crisis of the 737 Max.
The American manufacturer continues its crossing of the desert, largely weakened by the crisis of the 737 Max.
They have such a huge backlog of orders already (like several years huge) that any new orders of the MAX probably don't make sense to the airlines.
But I don't think this will be a huge problem for Boeing, actually. I just hope they will learn from this.
Hope. Where would humans be, without it?
Safely on the ground, probably.
