Talk:Boeing KC-767
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Controversies and political details
From Boeing 767 talk on KC-767
- .. I just added some additiona KC-X information to the KC-767 article, you might want to see if you want to tweak any of it. I'm also wondering at what point we might want to start a separate article on the KC-X RFP, especially if Boeing fields a KC-777 instead of the 767. Given the controversies, and the availability of citations, maybe move some of the political stuff out of the aircraft articles so that they just reflect the actual aircraft? Akradecki 21:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I think just letting things go until after winner of the KC-X is decided. Then intervening details won't be as important and can be summarized. That's my take anyway. -Fnlayson 21:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I've just finished adding more development details and cites. Akradecki 21:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I think just letting things go until after winner of the KC-X is decided. Then intervening details won't be as important and can be summarized. That's my take anyway. -Fnlayson 21:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- If it looks like it will get really political, and I think it will, then I'd be for the KC-X page, esp if Boeing goes with the 777. Yes, it will have a lot of info that will need to go once the wimmer is decided, but hey - that's the fun of a web-based pedia~ - BillCJ 23:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] KC-767 designation official?
I removed this statement " KC-767 is approved as an official designation under the 1962 United States Tri-Service aircraft designation system." from the bottom of the lead. I don't see how this can be official until until the plane wins the KC-X. I'm not seeing any Boeing or DoD press releases that mention this. -Fnlayson 17:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- See Talk:1962 United States Tri-Service aircraft designation system for a detailed explanation on why the KC-767 is an official allocation for the 767, though of course not for the KC-X. - BillCJ 17:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I corrected the wording. That's covered in better detail in the Lease section. -Fnlayson 18:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I got to this a little, sorry. I saw you had made adjustments right after I posted that. - BillCJ 18:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem. Thanks for the link. I added/reworded to explain that better. Please review. -Fnlayson 18:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- The first sentence in the Export section makes it seem like the lease came first, then gives the date of 2001 for the Japanese ordering the KC-767J. This needs to be reworded, but my brain refuses to concentrate enough to think of the right words to change/use. Can you see if you can do anything here? Thanks. - BillCJ 18:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'll look at it. There was probably so overlap with the US and export efforts. I'll wait until this other editor quits redoing everything though. -Fnlayson 18:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry did not see this till now- I too missed the interim edits and then had edit conflict. Seems like we have fixed it now though! A75