With just a quick count on the first page we have 7 threads on the subject, sure this particular bill may not have been mentioned but the topic has been beaten to death.
It's like "Why doesn't the B777 have Winglets?" in Tech/Ops, or "NW DC-9's," in Civil Aviation (or so I hear, since I don't browse that group). It's a topic that most of the regulars are sick of.
First of all, I am not a new poster, despite what you write. Secondly, I an not engaging in a KC767 v. KC330, A v. B thread. The only purpose of my post was to point people to the Washington Post link. They are welcome to make their own judgments.
Which you could have done in one of the 7 other threads that are on just the first page on this subject. There are at least 5 threads (most no longer on the first page) that I can count that have gone rather in depth on the program.
Most everyone that has been watching this program knew that it was going back to competition after the scandal involving a top USAF
procurement officials. The bill only made it official, also anyone familiar with American politics also knows that though EADS can bid, and has to at least get the appearance that they are being taken seriously, that it's highly unlikely that Airbus will win the contract.
I guess when I have all the experience and RR you do, I'll be able to pass judgment on other people's posts.
What a glorious personal insult. Particularly aimed at someone that normally posts once a week anymore, I am no longer on the radar for RR
. Now I do admit that you appear have more experience than I flying, but I highly doubt that you have more experience with defense appropriations.
At worst, you screw up and die.