3,000 jobs to go at Waste O'Space
Err? I don't believe there is any UK taxpayer's dosh in the development of the Macchi? Doesn't that make it Commercial Off The Shelf to Her Majesty's Forces?
Or am I being incredibly dull?
LJ
Or am I being incredibly dull?
LJ
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: York
Age: 53
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Is it a coincidence that Woodford (and probably Brough and Salmesbury in due course) is probably worth more per year as a prime building site than it was as one of production? "
I wonder if this could tie in with the creation of flood defenses which started being built around the Brough site about 6 months ago. I very much suspect its been penciled in for housing for a very long time. Simply sad.
I wonder if this could tie in with the creation of flood defenses which started being built around the Brough site about 6 months ago. I very much suspect its been penciled in for housing for a very long time. Simply sad.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mk 128
LJ,
Having read many a script, I'd never accuse you of not being switched on.
My point was that at time of ordering the Italian aircraft was still made of paper, and still has not had chance to develop much of a track record. If it had been selected rather than the Hawk, this would have been a development bet as per A400M, rather than a nice, 10 years + developed US aircraft which, it seems, most posters would rather have.
Having read many a script, I'd never accuse you of not being switched on.
My point was that at time of ordering the Italian aircraft was still made of paper, and still has not had chance to develop much of a track record. If it had been selected rather than the Hawk, this would have been a development bet as per A400M, rather than a nice, 10 years + developed US aircraft which, it seems, most posters would rather have.
Last edited by Mend em; 29th Sep 2011 at 21:14. Reason: typo (again)
I agree it was a safe bet for aircrew less than 6 foot 2 inches who have a penchant for vintage aircraft - the design originates from 40+ years ago!
I think the Hawker Siddley 1182 (HS1182), or Hawk as we now know it, was the winning bidder for an Air Staff target on 1 Oct 1971!
LJ
I think the Hawker Siddley 1182 (HS1182), or Hawk as we now know it, was the winning bidder for an Air Staff target on 1 Oct 1971!
LJ
Also, to be picky, the Aermacchi M346's first prototype flew in 1996 when it was a joint venture with Yakolev. This partnership dissolved in the late 90s and Aermacchi went it alone. The first production version rolled off the line on 7 Jun 03 and flew on 15 Jul 04. The Hawk 128 on the other hand was awarded the contract as a "paper aircraft" on 22 Dec 04 - some 5 months after the Macchi's first flight. The Hawk 128 did not fly until 27 Jul 05 over 1 year later.
As I said, a corrupt deal to keep the fat boy adulterer in a job in his constuency, and yet again the RAF get a cr@p deal.
Enough to make me weep...
LJ
As I said, a corrupt deal to keep the fat boy adulterer in a job in his constuency, and yet again the RAF get a cr@p deal.
Enough to make me weep...
LJ
BTW anyone know what happened to the posts by the alleged BAe worker confirming corrupt competition last night? I think his nome-de-plume was "kiliwix" or something like that. The posts were made about 2230hrs and had dissapeared by the morning (along with the quotes from the post made by other posters)?
Is Pprune in the payment of t'Baron or am I turning into a nut- job conspiracy theorist?
LJ
Is Pprune in the payment of t'Baron or am I turning into a nut- job conspiracy theorist?
LJ
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJ
You're a nut-job conspiracy theorist! From what I've read to appear to take it as a personal affront that someone didn't give you everything you wanted.
Oh and to clarify one thing, COTS is only COTS as long as you take it as it is produced. As soon as you change anything at all it becomes MOTS (Modified off the shelf) which then starts the cash tills ringing. As soon as it is MOTS then there are two sets of drawings (one for original and one for the modified) plus associated paperwork etc. That isn't a cash cow, that's just good engineering of a complex system.
You're a nut-job conspiracy theorist! From what I've read to appear to take it as a personal affront that someone didn't give you everything you wanted.
Oh and to clarify one thing, COTS is only COTS as long as you take it as it is produced. As soon as you change anything at all it becomes MOTS (Modified off the shelf) which then starts the cash tills ringing. As soon as it is MOTS then there are two sets of drawings (one for original and one for the modified) plus associated paperwork etc. That isn't a cash cow, that's just good engineering of a complex system.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
BTW anyone know what happened to the posts by the alleged BAe worker confirming corrupt competition last night? I think his nome-de-plume was "kiliwix" or something like that. The posts were made about 2230hrs and had dissapeared by the morning (along with the quotes from the post made by other posters)?
These are not the droids you are looking for. It seems.
