A win for CT. F-35 will use Pratt & Whitney engines.
 

One of CTs most important industries, glad to see they're still going okay.

Ah, the sweet smell of bacon!

Awesome!:cool:

Just yesterday I saw a full page ad in Politico by GE/Rolls-Royce saying their F36 was better and the F-35 was way over budget. I guess that was ad money wasted.

Indeed.

There must be some interesting internal questions among our (CT's) politicians in D.C. As one would expect, typical New England Democrats, among the most liberal in the country. Yet the bulk of their constituents rely heavily on the either the defense industry (Pratt, Sikorsky, Electric Boat are the biggies, 100's more in the parts and machining industries supplying the biggies), military base (Groton Sub Base) or the evil insurance companies.

That whole politics and strange bedfellows thing.

Advocate advertising is nothing new. In the early 70's the bus companies banded together to kill Amtrak. They took out full page ads in DC papers and I think the New York Times that offered to send each member of Congress a toy train set. All they had to do was ask for it.

The banner read 'If Congress wants a train to play with they can have this one!'

The goal was to cut off all funding to Amtrak which was taking away business from the bus lines.

Too bad they lost. Now we have gov subsidized rail which is also taxed by gov. Is that stupid or what?

Must be some gnashing of teeth going on. Isn't that the same GE that is a big time Friend of Obama?

If you are moving vast amount of weight overland rail is the best way to go.

If you are moving small amounts of weight, such as people, overland rail is the worst way to go.

If you are moving vast amounts of equipment AND people overland, such as a troop train, nothing can do it faster than rail. One train load of equipment can carry the same amount as 250 transport aircraft.

Amtrak costs us all money, but it is a part of our national defense network so I don't think it is going anywhere.

As a taxpayer:

You're welcome.

Interesting the myth that Democrats/Liberals oppose defense spending; their issue is usually what the weapon systems are used for rather than their creation. As for ‘evil insurance companies,’ the HC Reform Act was their greatest expression of love.

Otherwise proof The System will never change – voters complain about pork, earmarks, and how awful Congress is but still expect the bacon to be delivered.

If it's so wunnerful it should be profitable....

You mean like the rest of the Department of Defense?

In Oklahoma there was a gun that was on the drawing board. The chassis for it was already in production and a prototype was built and tested.

Then Congress killed the deal and Sen. Inhofe of Oklahoma went nuts. He could not understand why an 11 billion dollar weapon system should be canned just because....

The Army said it had no use for it.

The costs had overrun to twenty-five mill per weapon from 4.5 mill.

It was too heavy to travel by rail since it would bend the rails over.

There was no aircraft large enough to lift it. It was built so that two of them would fit inside a C5-A, but then the aircraft did not have enough power to take off.

This was in 2002 and Rumsfeld just could not see putting anymore money into it. Does this prove that Republican oppose Defense spending?

What monster cannon was this? :confused:

Or are you talking about that self propelled artillery cannon that got killed?(Crusader was it?)

Some Bozo started a Regan thread recently--a happy birthday one. ........ well America started the major foothold LOSS on securety in 81-2 when he just gave the defense dept a free checkbook and spending immediately began at $384 million an hour.
Now the current repubs are using what Obama HAD to do to avoid catastrophy as their current angle to beat the Dems over the head.

These guys are our moral compass ---Yea....Sure!