Why would anyone trust Boeing with such a project?
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2025
279 points (98.3% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
7261 readers
1178 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Political convenience is a big one with them. At least with the passenger airplanes, their only competitor is very non-American Airbus, so they're not only too big to fail but too embarrassing to fail.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if in 10 years their liners regularly fall out of the sky, and the US government just covers it up domestically the way China does with a lot of their corner cutting.
That being said, I can't rule out that their bid wasn't just better here, at least on paper.
But then there's still a couple of other manufacturers available, isn't there? LM, NG... can't think of a third one currently... Boeing would be the last place I would go to for reliable and critical engineering
NG decided not to bid, actually, so it was a binary choice.
Boeing has put a bunch of flight hours on the experiential version, how well that translates to a production version who knows. If LM doesn't challenge then it's pretty clear Boeing's prototype was significantly better.
At least it's not SpaceX
Would you really want to bet the future of your country on Boeing making something? They dropped the ball on passenger airplanes and a spacecraft
At least we know there will be debris in a field every time we launch a sortie.
The other option is lockheed, who just built an f35 that costs way too much money and doesnt meet requirements so its maybe better than the f22
Y'know, from what I've seen of the F-35 it's an amazingly sane machine considering the requirements it had to meet were very much not sane.
The program cost too much money or each airframe costs too much money?
Next frame: it includes a exclusive bonus 3 album set by Bitchin' Betty.
The flying wing looks like they left off the cover for the AA battery.
Those would be the open weapon bays
Dropping some massive AA batteries with their ends connected to each other
Using Spotify Flight thing
Japan announcing a VF-1 Valkyrie that play’s city pop would make me nut into the 5th dimension.
Boing!!!
Damn, I’m more of an Apple Music guy.
If we can at least plug in an SD card or something w/ music files, I think the Gripen 2 could be workable.
Agreed!