Comments on: Boeing riding high on Dreamliner

By: steve

steve — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 01:29:15 +0000

Oh, they also want to be an assembler, not parts manufacturer.

By: steve

steve — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 01:27:53 +0000

Boeing has been actively modeling itself after airbus, so much for that argument. That’s why they sold off Wichita, didn’t fit in with their dreams of being primarily a company that designs and sells commercial aircraft, and outsources the ‘metal bending’.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:13:28 +0000

The B-29, the 707 – originally built as a tanker – the b52, etc., etc.

By: Vaughn Tolle

Vaughn Tolle — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:43:19 +0000

I recall hearing, on a History Channel program, a while back that Boeing at one time in the 1930s was teetering on the edge of Bankruptcy as a commercial airplane manufacturer, and that it was “saved” by obtaining the contract to build the B-17. If this is true, Boeing has been on the government dole, in small part or large part, for a good deal of its existence, and in fact owes its very existence to the military. Does anyone out there have any data which substantiates or refutes this?

By: Uh Huh

Uh Huh — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:47:00 +0000

Thats like saying Boeing is completely devoid of government influence and interaction. Where does Boeing get most of its money anyways? The airline industry? Some, but think about it some more. Oh right, the United States Government and specifically NASA and the Military. So funny we forget that…