Hi all. Just wanted to share my opinions. I think it's sad that the commanche won't be built, but stricly from a helicopter enthusiast point of view.
However, financially, I see it as a sound option. I'm sure that the community that was to build the aircraft will be greatly affected, but as in all things in life, not everyone can win.
The only point I strongly disagree with is that made by jimz66 : "Matt your dead wrong it is extremly neccesary to the future for the future safety or our nation and our troups"
Safety from whom? No amount of military WARFARE technology is going to stop things like 9/11 from happening. Monitoring and passive hardware is what's needed. The United States effectively invaded Afghanistan, and stopped any attacks from stemming over there. However, the Iraq invasion was based on a NBC threat, a threat that was supported by 'evidence' that amounted to little more than a few hundred gas masks the US troops found. The US is allready in an overwhelmingly more powerful situation. It wasa matter of weeks/months to invade the previously two noted locales, and that is a remarkably short period of time. So obviously more advanced technology on the fronts is not that neccessary.
So, it leads to one conclusion, which is why I don't understand your point jimz66. Protect you from what? THere is no viable front where the machine like the Comanche is needed. Allready the Blackhawks and AH-64s are FAR superior to anything the US has/will face now.
Just my opinions anyways