kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2468 posts, RR: 21 Posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3608 times:
Looking at the slowing and eminent shutdown of the C-17 line, and considering that there may be nations out there that would procure the plane in better economic times, would it be rational for Boeing to solicit orders based on a lease with option to buy procurement plan?
OK, the tanker lease concept had problems, however there were lessons learned that could be applied to a new proposal for C-17 leasing.
mffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 908 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3586 times:
There were rumors we might see an order or two @ Dubai... we'll see...
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11715 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3493 times:
IIRC, the first 5 C-17s were originally leased, by the RAF. But before the 5th airplane was delivered, the UK decided to convert the lease program to buying all of the airplanes. So, it has been done before for the C-17.
474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3248 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2): IIRC, the first 5 C-17s were originally leased, by the RAF. But before the 5th airplane was delivered, the UK decided to convert the lease program to buying all of the airplanes. So, it has been done before for the C-17.
The RAF's first leased C-17's was delivered in May 2001. The original leases were very restrictive and after 9-11 and the UK's became involved with the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the decision was made buy the leased aircraft when their leases expired and purchase an additional two aircraft.
ebj1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3124 times:
Quoting kanban (Reply 4): OK, it's been done before, however the question is if Boeing offered a lease with option today would there be any takers?
With the United States apparently not wanting any new builds and Boeing in a position where it's apparently not desperate to sell more C-17s, does it make sense to go out on a limb with a leasing program for possible "would be" buyers. Wouldn't Boeing do better to take a proactive approach and begin studying what the Air Force and other nations' armed forces might need for a C-17 replacement in the future?
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2468 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3079 times:
Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 5): Wouldn't Boeing do better to take a proactive approach and begin studying what the Air Force and other nations' armed forces might need for a C-17 replacement in the future?
they are doing that I think one idea was a massive tilt rotor, and then there is the frog or whatever it is called. However with the cost of a new design and start-up costs, I think it would be better to keep the C-17 line running even at a low rate for another ten years or more.
Galaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 586 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2996 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2): IIRC, the first 5 C-17s were originally leased, by the RAF. But before the 5th airplane was delivered, the UK decided to convert the lease program to buying all of the airplanes. So, it has been done before for the C-17
The first 4 RAF C-17s were leased...The 5th, 6th and 7th jets were bought out right. The lease of the first 4 jets (USAF serials 00-0201-0204) ZZ171 through ZZ174 was set to expire in mid 2008. The RAF announced the purchase of the first four aircraft and purchased their 5th C-17 outright in late 2006 and was delivered in early 2008 (ZZ175, USAF serial 06-0205). As they picked up ZZ175, they bought ZZ176. The USAF gave them a production slot, so they got the jet in June of 08 (Assigned USAF serial 08-0206). In December 09, the RAF purchased their seventh jet, ZZ177 (USAF serial 09-0207) which was delivered to them in January 2011. ZZ177 wears the 10th anniversary tail art on its tail since the RAF has had their C-17 fleet running since May 2001.
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7): Besides, didn't they just sold 10 to India?
Yes, the India order is supposed to keep the line open through 2014. There is still an option for them to aquire another 6 jets as well. The RAF has buzz about getting a 8th C-17 and the RAAF announced its intent on getting a 6th C-17 as well. The UAE still has two jets to be delivered. A couple other countries expressed interest, but nobody else has made anything of it. There is still buzz about the USAF trying to store the tooling as well; but thats still up in the air as well.
I think they should keep the line warm; a large chunk of the USAF fleet have around 15K hours on the airframes already. I'm a C-5 guy myself, but with the retirement of 32 jets, the USAF should consider either storing the tooling, or getting a few more C-17s before nailing the coffin shut. Boeing has proposed different versions of the C-17, but nothing has been worth the cost.
The C-5 may be a FRED, but once you learn the ins and outs of it, the C-5 Galaxy is a awesome plane!
oykie From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2577 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2888 times:
Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 5): Wouldn't Boeing do better to take a proactive approach and begin studying what the Air Force and other nations' armed forces might need for a C-17 replacement in the future?
I believe this is a good idea. Last year Aviation Week said Boeing looked into a C-17FE for Fuel Efficient. In short the story suggested a narrower C-17, composite materials and perhaps new engines for the Joint Future Theater Lift program.
Quoting mffoda (Reply 1): There were rumors we might see an order or two @ Dubai... we'll see
Other than Qatar?
Quoting kanban (Thread starter): however there were lessons learned that could be applied to a new proposal for C-17 leasing.
Not a bad idea. Did not someone suggest Lockheed Martin thought about this as well to use the C-5 Galaxy to offer its unique capabilities like Antonov with their An-124 and An-225?
[Edited 2011-11-14 11:27:31]
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
Bluewave 707 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3139 posts, RR: 8 Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2563 times:
The BC-17 commercial freighter program, unfortunately, never really took hold. FedEx and UPS had looked into the idea of using civilianized C-17 fo their ops.
"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2468 posts, 
From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2577 posts, 
From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
