Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Yeager on February 24, 2011, 04:16:01 PM
-
Seattle area news and WA congressman's office reporting......
-
Heh...wonderful. Yet another 30 year old design going into service :rolleyes:
-
Ya beat me Yeager you Boeing brat! :)
(http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/02/24/KC-46A_560.jpg)
-
Heh...wonderful. Yet another 30 year old design going into service :rolleyes:
Ehhh, yeah. Just about everything about the 767 from an engineering aspect is about 10 years old. The only original design on today's 767 aircraft are wing spars and the aluminum skin.
How old is the 707? 53 years old? ;)
-
See Rule #6
-
As is the case with most aircraft I would, especially military......the F-22 was initially designed in the 80's.
Reusing certain designs is not necessarily a bad thing either....
Strip
-
Ehhh, yeah. Just about everything about the 767 from an engineering aspect is about 10 years old. The only original design on today's 767 aircraft are wing spars and the aluminum skin.
How old is the 707? 53 years old? ;)
Ok, fair enough :)
-
Best statement I've heard so far is "Our grandfathers and grandmothers built B-17s and B-29s that helped win WW2, our fathers and mothers built commercial jets that allowed us to travel anywhere in the world comfortaby, it only makes sense... that Ameican Dads and Moms built the next generation Air Tanker Refueler"
-
I don't like it because it takes away from what would have been a great deal of infrastructure and jobs for the state I live in. But the hand writing was on the wall when Boeing whined enough and tossed more money at the lost competition back in 2008 and I will not get into the political side of it with Chicago based Boeing and a certain Chicago based governmental leader.
-
Big news for Connecticut's Pratt and Whitney too ... P&W will be supplying 400 engines for those birds.
-
See Rule #6
Fascinating...I dont even remember what I posted :headscratch:
-
everyone is saying that it needs to be built by americans, what mobile, al. ain't part of america? what pisses me about this, like reschke, that certain officials in high government are in the same town as boeing's headquarters. also, which team had a plane up and flying to test thier design. sorry guys, it just pisses me off. i was hoping to be one of the 35,000 people hired on.
-
I've mixed feelings on the Boeing win - not questioning the Boeing quality aspect, but the AL facility and its "local" subtier suppliers, not to mention commuting employees, would have spilled over into MS... bringing more "hi tech" jobs to the AL-MS region is good.
-
I just hope we get a new tanker before the ones we have start falling out of the sky, literally. I personally subscribe to the boeing philosophy especially regarding flight controls limits and full vs. partial authority fly-by-wire laws, but that's just me. There have been mishaps directly related to problems with airbus flight controls, but there have also been just as many "airshow practice" crashes of large aircraft that were flown beyond their limits too. I'd rather the pilot have the option to maneuver a military aircraft "as required" instead of forbidding maneuvering beyond the limiters, but that's because my job requires full 3D maneuvering capability and I've never had a flying job that didn't require that sort of capability.
Maybe when I'm older or want to try flying in my sleep, I'll appreciate flight control limiters. In the meantime, I think a boeing tanker will make a fine KC-135 replacement, and it's overdue by about 10 years. Our 135 fleet is EXPENSIVE because they're so worn out.
-
Well another part of the problem that I have with it is what is already mentioned. The aircraft in question from EADS/Northrop is already in production and in my view production costs tend to be lower on an item that is already being produced. Unlike typical US based defense contractors which tend to go with a route of building something that is seriously cool and necessary but then taking the government to the cleaners on the cost over runs; simply because the government can print the money they need to back it up. I honestly look for this project to get canceled within the next few years just because it goes through the roof with cost and delays. THEN the longest flying aircraft in the USAF will not be the B-52 it will be the KC-135.
-
everyone is saying that it needs to be built by americans, what mobile, al. ain't part of america? what pisses me about this, like reschke, that certain officials in high government are in the same town as boeing's headquarters. also, which team had a plane up and flying to test thier design. sorry guys, it just pisses me off. i was hoping to be one of the 35,000 people hired on.
THEY WERENT BEING BUILT IN MOBILE ONLY ASSEMBLED from preassembled pieces! Big difference between the two. Airbus was building the planes in Europe and shipping them to US to be assembled and finished as tankers.
Boeing will create more jobs than EADS would have and Boeing has actually stated the near exact amount of new jobs it would need to support the tanker program. It was over 30,000 while EADS was only saying 10,000-20,000. EADS was also supposed to build this assembly line two years ago for the A330F and its still not there.
Boeing has delivered 4 already to Japan and the first of four to Italy. The A330 tanker has yet to see service and just last month suffered a complete boom failure and detachment from the plane. Boeing has been doing this for 60 years, twice as long as Airbus has even been making planes.
Lets get real people and quit being so dang greedy. Your region doesn’t deserve the jobs any more than any other place in this country. We all are in the same boat together as a country. My local region lost millions of jobs in the 70's when the steel industry shut down because everyone else in the country had to get their steel cheaper from china. We didn’t go around saying we need the jobs more than anyone else and support a deal that would cost all US taxpayers more money because we needed the jobs. Instead we built up our region with new industries and companies that are successful and are now leading in their respective markets. Sorry if it sounds harsh, I’m just tired of reading post from all the people in Alabama supporting the KC-45 because it would bring them jobs, not because of it being the better tanker for the mission, which it wasn’t. The only reason it won the last time was because NG/EADS had the grading criteria changed to favor a larger aircraft, which if it hadn’t been changed, they weren’t going to bid. Plus the KC-767 won over the airbus aircraft back in 2002 with the initial contract.
This competition was to replace the KC-135, not the KC-10. The KC-330/45 or whatever you want to call it is larger than the KC-10 in every dimension but doesn’t even hold as much fuel as the KC-10. If an airline wants to replace a 707 (for example) on a near 1-1 capacity basis they aren’t going to go buy a A330. They would buy a 737-800. The 767 is already larger than the KC-135 but fits its capabilities and then some the best and was the cheapest option. The entire competition was for the Cheapest KC-135 sized plane. Boeing was cheaper, meaning your taxes aren’t going to be raised to support the larger and un-need KC-45.
-
Well another part of the problem that I have with it is what is already mentioned. The aircraft in question from EADS/Northrop is already in production and in my view production costs tend to be lower on an item that is already being produced. Unlike typical US based defense contractors which tend to go with a route of building something that is seriously cool and necessary but then taking the government to the cleaners on the cost over runs; simply because the government can print the money they need to back it up. I honestly look for this project to get canceled within the next few years just because it goes through the roof with cost and delays. THEN the longest flying aircraft in the USAF will not be the B-52 it will be the KC-135.
Why? so you and i and everyone else in this "great" country can pay an extra couple of billions worth of taxes?
Read my post above about being in production. EADS bird isnt in service, the KC-767 already is!
-
Great news for the city of Wichita, Kansas.
-
Heh...wonderful. Yet another 30 year old design going into service :rolleyes:
If it's so insuperior and outdated, then why did "the best" steal a copy of it and incorporate those 30-year old defunct ideas into their own design?
Far from it. About as many similar parts as you'll find on a 30 year-old mustang and a new one made this year is about as many I'd figure you'd find on that 767. And I still don't think Airbus has properly repaid Boeing in kind for copying from their design the last time... you know, this 30 year-old outdated Boeing design going into service that is the same one Airbus went outa their way to steal a copy of to cheat onto their own design and push it into the lead during the last round that made everyone with any common sence on this matter go :confused: :huh :headscratch: :bolt: :furious ...
Here you go sir, I believe you and Airbus lost something - :ahand
WTFG Boeing!!! Well deserved and properly awarded this time. :rock :rock :rock
-
Great news for the city of Wichita, Kansas.
They definately needed it. Talk about boom or bust.
-
The A330 tanker has yet to see service and just last month suffered a complete boom failure and detachment from the plane.
The first EADS KC-45A tanker aircraft was built and flown in September 2007.
-
blah blah blah Sorry if it sounds harsh, I’m just tired of reading post from all the people in Alabama supporting the KC-45 because it would bring them jobs, not because of it being the better tanker for the mission, which it wasn’t. blah blah blah
As for the comments about people from Alabama or the south building and pushing to have jobs brought to our region....yeah well at least we were not bashing the people in the north or northwest for wanting Boeing to get the contract; unlike the way that the fine representatives and senators from that region were when the contract was protested in 2008. Also the first time it was awarded to Boeing it was found to have been acquired fraudulently with kick backs and other things tossed at Pentagon and USAF people involved with Boeing people. The jobs they would have created would have been all US based jobs and not just in the south. I am sure that some of Boeing suppliers all around the US are/would have been the same sub-component and component suppliers for EADS as well. The simple reason is that there is only a limited number of those types of people in the world and they all work for the same contracts all the time.
Assembly...have you ever seen the inside of a automotive assembly plant or any other type of factory? Nothing is ever made on site. All components are made in other places and brought to one spot for final assembly....hence the name Assembly Plant.
I will say it again...I seriously doubt this tanker from Boeing ever sees the fully contracted number of aircraft in US Military usage; I also think that the EADS bid would have suffered the same fate. Over budget and out of time; as our native USAF pilot has stated this puppy was needed 10 years ago; which means it should have been designed and produced at least 15 years ago.
-
The first EADS KC-45A tanker aircraft was built and flown in September 2007.
so? its still not in service though. the first KC-767 flew in 2005 and went into service with Japan in 2008.
-
As for the comments about people from Alabama or the south building and pushing to have jobs brought to our region....yeah well at least we were not bashing the people in the north or northwest for wanting Boeing to get the contract; unlike the way that the fine representatives and senators from that region were when the contract was protested in 2008. Also the first time it was awarded to Boeing it was found to have been acquired fraudulently with kick backs and other things tossed at Pentagon and USAF people involved with Boeing people. The jobs they would have created would have been all US based jobs and not just in the south. I am sure that some of Boeing suppliers all around the US are/would have been the same sub-component and component suppliers for EADS as well. The simple reason is that there is only a limited number of those types of people in the world and they all work for the same contracts all the time.
Assembly...have you ever seen the inside of a automotive assembly plant or any other type of factory? Nothing is ever made on site. All components are made in other places and brought to one spot for final assembly....hence the name Assembly Plant.
I will say it again...I seriously doubt this tanker from Boeing ever sees the fully contracted number of aircraft in US Military usage; I also think that the EADS bid would have suffered the same fate. Over budget and out of time; as our native USAF pilot has stated this puppy was needed 10 years ago; which means it should have been designed and produced at least 15 years ago.
Actually you had John McCaine lobbying against boeing from the get go with the first contract. Who do you think it was that got the requirements changed so Airbus would enter it in the first place the second time around? take a guess. Yup, John McCain did. Also i havent seen anyone from the NW say anything bad about mobile or the region.
The first time around, Boeing won fair and square the issue was that the AF were going to lease 80 of the 100 aircraft instead of own. J.M doesnt know anything about tankers and said it made no sense because there would be no after market for them (ignoring the fact that many small airforces around the world buy our aircraft after we are done with them), but it actually would have been cheaper then the contracts of today consider everything that the competetion has gone through to get here. The illegal issue was that Boeing gave some people who were involved with the contract jobs after the fact. Then it was put on hold and then canceled.
Aircraft assembly and car assembly is totally different especially in the form of assembly Boeing and airbus has started to use for their latest projects. With the EADS a/c, US parts would be made in the US, shipped to Europe (on tax payers money), the aircraft would be assembled and then disassembled into large sections (like the 787 is being done now), shipped to Mobile (again at tax payers expenses), reassembled in Mobile, had cargo floor installed, outfitted for the tanker role and delivered. The Boeing plane, manufactured then shipped straight to Washington from where ever it was made and then final assembly.
i dont understand why you think that? we have 500 KC-135's that need to be replaced, we arent going to drop down to a fleet of 179 or less a/c only. I bet it reaches 300 a/c pretty quickly. Whats the alternate, continue to operate 50 year old aircraft until they fall out of the sky?
-
:cheers: to creating jobs! :aok
-
They definately needed it. Talk about boom or bust.
Yes, a lot of people in Wichita lost their jobs in the industry. Not sure how many jobs this will create for us.
-
Yes, a lot of people in Wichita lost their jobs in the industry. Not sure how many jobs this will create for us.
Yeah, I knew quite a few that got laid off by Cessna. Hopefully this'll turn things around for em. It'll help out in a number of other areas as well. I'm sure everyone from parts suppliers to restaurant owners are glad this went through.
-
Yes, a lot of people in Wichita lost their jobs in the industry. Not sure how many jobs this will create for us.
i want to say boing's number for kansas was between 1000-5000 new jobs in Kansas. I cant remember exactly from when i looked through all last year's press releases to count how many new jobs they announced they would create.
-
Yeah, I knew quite a few that got laid off by Cessna. Hopefully this'll turn things around for em. It'll help out in a number of other areas as well. I'm sure everyone from parts suppliers to restaurant owners are glad this went through.
The Boeing contract along with Cabela's and some huge home improvement and lumber company will be coming into Wichita in the next two years. With that, Wichita Mid-Continent Airport and Colonel James Jabara Airport arr in the planning stage of expanding and more flights in and out. All together, Wichita is grow to a larger city.
-
For the record, the number of jobs it would generate in the USA was NOT a part of the contract bid.
The 767 is built and assembled in the USA. Essentially we are delivering a "green" airplane, which is a commercial jet, flown to Wichita, and modded for the KC portion.
I agree with Rescke that the number awarded will probably not be met, budgets will be cut, and the military is usually the first, depending on which party is in office. ;)
Combine that with more autonomous aircraft entering the military that don't require as much fuel.