Article

2016-12-07 Government

Trump cancels Boeing-Air Force One deal in a tweet

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2016-12-07 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views ] Top

#1 ...Some thoughts:

1. Trump's right.
2. He didn't cancel anything; he hasn't the power to do so - at least not for a few more weeks, but if the nice people at Boeing have any sense at all they'll use those weeks to come up with a new price. I don't expect them to lose money, but there's no fracking way two airliners on steroids cost north of four billion.
3. The USAF needs to take that time and make some tough decisions too. Better on their own now than have it done for them later.

Mike

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2016-12-07 04:54|| 2016-12-07 04:54|| Front Page Top

#2 In military nomenclature its called a 'warning order'. You better start making preparations and planning yesterday.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-12-07 08:50|| 2016-12-07 08:50|| Front Page Top

#3 I suspect costs escalated dramatically since the contract was signed - 'change orders' are very expensive and very common with government contracts, so much so that I am convinced they are an intended way of awarding contracts and favors.

Posted by Glenmore 2016-12-07 11:28|| 2016-12-07 11:28|| Front Page Top

#4 Their inflated costs are also used to cover activities intended to remediate poor original design and planning oversight Glenmore, as part of a low-bidding strategy.

"Oh, you want a refrigerator?"
("Let's expand the wiring harness, upgrade the power conduit, add a breaker and GFCI then build a load footprint and vertical anchor framework.")
"Do you want a chilled water feed in that?"

Posted by Skidmark 2016-12-07 11:44|| 2016-12-07 11:44|| Front Page Top

#5 They're agog at this out there in the world beyond our borders, for some reason...

They can't understand why he wouldn't want to get more graft from more change orders. "Why not add a $500 million pool table - wink, wink?"

Posted by Bobby 2016-12-07 11:46|| 2016-12-07 11:46|| Front Page Top

#6 Then there's the prayer mat that constantly repositions to point to Mecca during flight...

Posted by Glenmore 2016-12-07 11:47|| 2016-12-07 11:47|| Front Page Top

#7 one of the horrible things about this sort of contract is that a lot of costs are in the design phase

the contractor gets an order to design something
costs incurred in the design
customer says, 'oh just add this do hickey'
costs incurred in redesign which sometimes requires almost starting over
custormer says, 'oh and make the such a such larger'
and so it goes until a $ billion has been spent and the only deliverables are sets of plans and specs that have been superceded

Posted by lord garth 2016-12-07 12:29|| 2016-12-07 12:29|| Front Page Top

#8 Saw a post (can't find it now) from a military guy.

We have 4 747 doomsday planes with all the stuff needed to run the country/military after a nuclear war that can fly almost 24/7 (with refueling). We bought them for just under a billion in 1998 dollars.

Now we can't make 2 air force grade 747s for less than 3.7 billion? Something doesn't add up.

Posted by DarthVader 2016-12-07 12:41|| 2016-12-07 12:41|| Front Page Top

#9 Somebody remind me how they can make B-52s fly for 50-60 years. Not so many golf trips, or buzzing Manhattan?

Posted by Bobby 2016-12-07 12:48|| 2016-12-07 12:48|| Front Page Top

#10 Not to be unpatriotic, but DJT could probably get a screamin' deal from Airbus on an A380 right about now ( sales dropping like flies, production down to 1 a month due to loss of interest by airlines)

Posted by USN, Ret. 2016-12-07 15:02|| 2016-12-07 15:02|| Front Page Top

#11 Disclaimer, I work for Boeing. But we need a little truth on the subject. Boeing works the design, the bells and whistles, as specified in the SOW. Boeing does not dream up the equipment that must be integrated into the aircraft, nor does it outline the EMP, laser, weapons, and other survivability systems built into the design. The Pentagon defines the requirements. Boeing is under contract to design the aircraft, and to see if all that is required is possible. The cost of this is by design, and yes Boeing is not cheap, but it will be correct.
Second point, after I politely threw the pentagon under the bus. Just where do we say enough is enough with the systems in the aircraft when the president is on board? The new threats, high power lasers, EMP,EMP tracking missiles, Unmanned weapons, etc... All have been developed after the latest version of Air Force one hit the street. Which vulnerability do you want to allow? Times have changed since the doomsday bird of the 70's and the air force one requirements of today. These birds are going to be pricy. And finally the numbers are not correct. The average cost of a green 747-8 is over $300 million.

Posted by 49 Pan 2016-12-07 19:10|| 2016-12-07 19:10|| Front Page Top

23:23 Procopius2k
22:37 Bangkok Billy
22:21 magpie
22:17 Bangkok Billy
21:59 Frank G
20:45 DarthVader
20:42 Zenobia Floger6220
20:34 Seeking cure for ignorance
20:25 Zenobia Floger6220
20:19 Skidmark
20:10 rjschwarz
20:01 Fred
20:00 Blossom Unains5562
19:56 Blossom Unains5562
19:53 Skidmark
19:51 Pholurt Uloluling1696
19:46 Zenobia Floger6220
19:37 Iblis
19:35 Flairt Elmineck4802
19:16 AlanC
19:10 49 Pan
19:10 Flairt Elmineck4802
19:06 49 Pan
18:39 SteveS