User avatar
kc135topboom
Topic Author
Posts: 11137
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:06 am

Now that Boeing has lost the KC-45 contest, will the USAF go ahaed and finalize the CSAR-X contract to them for new build HH-47Fs? Will Boeing also get another order of 21 more C-17s, bring the total USAF airplanes to 230?
 
bennett123
Posts: 9108
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:29 am

If Boeing build the best plane, they should get the job.

Quite why you want the loser to get a prize, I fail to understand.

That said, I think that the HH47 seems to be the better contender, and more C17 would be useful considering your need to fight at arms length.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Topic Author
Posts: 11137
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:32 am

It is in the USAF's best long term interest to keep Boeing in the military airplane business. By throwing them some other contracts, they can do that. Right now, the HH-47 and C-17 are the best way to do that. Perhaps Boeing will also have a decent chance at the 2018 Bomber program?
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4439
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:37 am

I think it is too far fetched to think Boeing is out of the business, just because they lost this (yet significant) tanker deal.

Boeing will stay in the military aircraft business, offering great planes with superb capabilities.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 12:23 pm

Will Boeing get a bone from the Air Force? I think they most definitely got boned by the Air Force!  duck 

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

But seriously, yes, I believe there will soon be an add on C-17 order to assuage the anger of the pro-Boeing crowd.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
GDB
Posts: 13272
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:00 pm

If such a 'bone' can also provide much needed extra capabilities for the USAF, why not?
They do want more C-17's.
And NATO could buy some, it should not affect A400M procurement since they are not directly comparable.
Getting the CSAR going again seems wise, for those who will operate and need them too.
 
na
Posts: 9724
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:00 pm

If the US is going ahead with the airborne laser, Boeing will get an order for about 10 748Fs.
In the case of the tanker they just offered the inferior product, so the didn´t deserve to win. No reason to think the USAF is suddenly anti-Boeing.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:40 pm

At least one bone is likely to come from a more relaxed attitude to US purchases from Europe. None other than Thomas Friedman says so! For some reason Wiki wants him to be Friendman, I rather doubt it!  Big grin  Wow!
 
trex8
Posts: 5365
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:56 pm

as others have said the C17s are needed not only for real operational needs but politically, the bone is getting those F15s fixed which McD messed up!
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:58 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 7):
At least one bone is likely to come from a more relaxed attitude to US purchases from Europe.

I'll believe that when I see european air forces pick the C-17 over the A400M. Aside from the few Anetters who believe everything airbus is better, the C-17 is superior to the A-400M in the same manner as the 332 tanker is the 767 tanker.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
trex8
Posts: 5365
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:13 pm



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 9):
I'll believe that when I see european air forces pick the C-17 over the A400M. Aside from the few Anetters who believe everything airbus is better, the C-17 is superior to the A-400M in the same manner as the 332 tanker is the 767 tanker.

the A400 is supposed to be a C130/Transall replacement, the C17 is in a different league. NATO certainly need more C17s than the piddly few they will get, but they also need lots of airlifters smaller than the C17!
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:16 pm



Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 3):
I think it is too far fetched to think Boeing is out of the business, just because they lost this (yet significant) tanker deal.

Boeing merged with MD to get their defense business, however since they have it seems like they have been faltering. Boeing is either a sub-contractor or offering a rehash of an old product. I miss the Boeing that gave us the B-17, B-29, and the B-52 etc.

If Boeing loses the CSAR-X program then I don't think it is unreasonable to start questioning how long they will remain in the defense business. What major contracts are on the horizon that Boeing has a good shot at winning? They grew their defense business by acquiring others, but they haven't really developed anything of their own.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:29 pm



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 9):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 7):
At least one bone is likely to come from a more relaxed attitude to US purchases from Europe.

I'll believe that when I see european air forces pick the C-17 over the A400M.

Well Trex8 has said it all, but yes, the needs for A440Ms and C-17s are not exclusive, and this decision will tend to push C-17s up the purchasing agenda(s). Certainly will not push them down.

WADR Halls, not seeing a role for a range of solutions is an area where the US tends to make strategic mistakes. Look at complementing rather than replacing.

At times one has to wonder if perhaps the US has been acting like a modern Mr Tweedly from that memorable Stan Freeberg song "Elderly Man River".
 
Zone1
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:47 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:33 pm



Quoting NorCal (Reply 11):
They grew their defense business by acquiring others, but they haven't really developed anything of their own.

The P-8A is one contract that they developed on their own.
/// U N I T E D
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22237
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:39 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
It is in the USAF's best long term interest to keep Boeing in the military airplane business.

They will be, with the 737-based P8. That alone is quite a bone.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
By throwing them some other contracts, they can do that.

Please, no!

Boeing has to show they can win a few contracts on their own merits.

KC-767: $1B invested for 8 frames sold (Japan, Italy), lost out to A330MRT in Britian, Australia, lost original US contract due to greed (excessively creative financing) and corruption (CFO in jail, CEO resigned)

KC-45A: Apparently not the right product for the job.

Wedgetail: late and over budget, penalties being paid.

Future Imagery Architecture reconnaissance satellites: won contract, then it was re-awarded to Lockheed after unacceptable cost and schedule overruns ("perhaps the most spectacular and expensive failure in the 50-year history of American spy satellite projects")

X32: Trounced by Lockheed's X35 in the JSF contest

F-18/F-15/C-17: Got market share the old fashioned way, by buying McDonnel-Douglas at great expense and with little effect. Legacy programs with limited upside.

Not to mention delays and penalty payments on 787...

Boeing: It's time to get your sh*t together!
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Curt22
Posts: 334
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:43 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:41 pm



Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 1):
If Boeing build the best plane, they should get the job.

I think both tanker candidates are fine acft, and hard to say what is "best" when judging two different airframes, one larger than the 747, the other, a more traditional size as compared to the current tanker fleet. I guess the added cargo capacity was a big selling point for the EADS jet, and who can argue with that?

Congrats to the winners for offering a fine platform...now comes the hard part, building a plant in Mobile AL, finding a qualified workforce, setting up the logistics of shipping parts from Europe to Mobile in a timely manner and HOPING the new facility isn't completely destroyed in the next major hurricane since the production facility selected sits directly on the Gulf of Mexico on Mobile Bay...(What could possibly go wrong?) LOL
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22237
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:52 pm



Quoting Curt22 (Reply 15):
HOPING the new facility isn't completely destroyed in the next major hurricane since the production facility selected sits directly on the Gulf of Mexico on Mobile Bay...

Well, I hope nothing bad happens there.

I visited the USS Alabama in Mobile Bay a few months before Katrina. Here's Wikipedia's account of what she experienced during Katrina.

Quote:
During Hurricane Katrina, Alabama suffered damage which resulted in an eight-degree list to port,[5] and shifting at her permanent anchorage. (The families of 18 museum employees were aboard during Katrina.[5]) In addition, the Aircraft Pavilion was severely damaged, with three of the exhibited aircraft destroyed. At the end of 2005, damage estimates were in excess of four million dollars. The park reopened 9 January 2006, with the ship having a three-degree list (which was still being corrected).

Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:12 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 12):
WADR Halls, not seeing a role for a range of solutions is an area where the US tends to make strategic mistakes. Look at complementing rather than replacing.

Too many people are apparently reading too much into what I said.

I'm not suggesting that buying C-17's is a fits all solution, nor am I suggesting the EU run right out and buy C-17's tomorrow. I was merely responding to the poster who said this decision would produce a more relaxed attitude towards EU purchases of US products. I'm not sure yet that it will, but you raise an interesting point.

I never once, in all these discussions, said the US military should NOT buy foreign products. As I have said before, most of my observations in the tanker threads were posted in response to those who complained about the Air Force potentially not buying the 330 because it was a foreign product. And my response was, all governments from time to time favor home grown products. Which I don't have a problem with.

Now, with regard to the tanker issue, we heard long and strong arguments about why the USAF should pick the 330 because it provided more - more cargo, more people, more capability.

So what did the USAF do? They picked the aircraft that was the better deal for the AF. Good for them. I hope Congress stays the hell out of this decision, and that Boeing keeps its lawyers occupied elsewhere.

Now, when it comes to replacing C-130's for EU air forces, why can't the same argument be made?

In one of the locked tanker threads, someone noted that for the cost of one C-17, you could haul more cargo in that one aircraft than you could in two A-400's. And that the purchase price of two A400's was relatively equal to that of one C-17. So, it seems to reason that an Air Force can spend the same amount up front for x number of C-17's as then can for 2 time x number of A400's, yet realize a clear savings per pound of cargo carried, given that your personnel and maintenance costs are smaller when you have fewer aircraft to man and maintain.

Now - if we hear "oh, but we have to make sure the A400 program is a success and purchase it even though it isn't as good a value as the C-17" - don't you think that it makes all the angst over the fear that the USAF might buy the 767 sound a little bit funny?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
Curt22
Posts: 334
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:43 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:17 pm



Quoting Revelation (Reply 16):
During Hurricane Katrina, Alabama suffered damage which resulted in an eight-degree list to port,[5] and shifting at her permanent anchorage. (The families of 18 museum employees were aboard during Katrina.[5]) In addition, the Aircraft Pavilion was severely damaged, with three of the exhibited aircraft destroyed. At the end of 2005, damage estimates were in excess of four million dollars. The park reopened 9 January 2006, with the ship having a three-degree list (which was still being corrected).

I heard the stories of USS Alabama's damage, Brookley Fld is approx 3 miles south of this massive ship that sustained significant damage.

Maybe more ominous is that Mobile sustained such damage and was 100 MILES east of Katrina's landfall...one need only look at what happened to Bay St Louis and Biloxi MS to see what WILL happen to the EADS plant in Mobile one day. Make no mistake, there WILL be more major hurricanes and all points of hurricane ally on the Gulf Coast get hit sooner or later.
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:24 pm



Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
Boeing has to show they can win a few contracts on their own merits.

Add to that list the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, which Boeing won the lion's share of the contract through fraudulent means (stolen propietary data for Lockheed's rival bid.) They ended up losing half of their contract in penalties.

Both vehicles (Delta IV and Atlas V) are now under the United Launch Alliance banner, not Boeing or Lockheed-Martin.
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2399
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:38 pm



Quoting Curt22 (Reply 18):
Maybe more ominous is that Mobile sustained such damage and was 100 MILES east of Katrina's landfall...one need only look at what happened to Bay St Louis and Biloxi MS to see what WILL happen to the EADS plant in Mobile one day. Make no mistake, there WILL be more major hurricanes and all points of hurricane ally on the Gulf Coast get hit sooner or later.

Well Mount St. Helens could erupt and close the Boeing plant as well!

Will the USAF throw Boeing a bone? No, but they'll give them the shaft the next time they try and pull a fast one over on the USAF by offering outdated products at exhorbant prices. My only question is what possible future sale of the KC-767 can Boeing expect or do they just close the line and begin work on their next tanker - the KC-787?
 
bhmbaglock
Posts: 2489
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:51 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:51 pm



Quoting Curt22 (Reply 18):
I heard the stories of USS Alabama's damage, Brookley Fld is approx 3 miles south of this massive ship that sustained significant damage.

With the money being invested in this project, it is a sure bet that the factories will be designed with hurricanes in mind. Large industrial projects get considerably more scrutiny than residential, particularly in the South where it's still not uncommon to have areas without building inspections for residential.

No different really than the earthquake precautions undoubtedly designed into Boeing production facilities in WA. KS has been known to have Tornado problems as well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there was any significant disruption of production at BFM for Continental or ST Aerospace as a result of Katrina.

Quoting Curt22 (Reply 18):
Maybe more ominous is that Mobile sustained such damage and was 100 MILES east of Katrina's landfall...

More like 75 miles and East is important because in this case, that is the area that was still getting strong circulation from the Gulf even after landfall. If Katrina had hit west of New Orleans, there would be almost nothing left; it's missed by many that they caught the weak side of the storm and MS took the hardest hit.

Ivan and Frederick were also very strong and hit considerably closer, again without significant damage to BFM. It's certainly not bulletproof in this area, but the track record is pretty good.
Where are all of my respected members going?
 
Venus6971
Posts: 1415
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:55 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:55 pm



Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
Boeing: It's time to get your sh*t together!

Yes you are right, they are finally taking some work back in house from Alenia in Italy that can't deliver for the 787, they fly their large cargo freighters empty to Japan to keep the crews current. The 787 program is beset by supplier issues that Boeing was trying to spread out the risk and become smaller and leaner.
Lets see if this moving parts to Toulese to Mobile will be effecient to delay production cost overuns, the first 330 has been built in Toulese but does yet have a boom on it and no refueling plumbing. Lets see if the European labor unions go along with the U.S. assembly in Mobile. Lets see if disgrunted Airbus employee in France can send quality parts back to Mobile for assembly. I am sure that these fighter pilot Generals who like this deal did not think it through the logistics side of it. Just one strike of French workers brings the Mobile plant to a halt. Lets see if a strike threathens the USAF mc rate if they can't get parts for their 330's. Now Congress is going to have to award money for U.S contractors to build a infrastucture for the 330 unless we just assign these jets to just Travis, Dover and McGuire. Here at Tinker I think there is one hanger that can fit a 330 and its the paint dock. NG/EADS have the contract but they have to deliver, so Boeing keep your design updated be ready if NG/EADS stumble . What about the PDM cycle , will they fly back to France for it, how many years will these birds give us, will they last as long as the C-135, can we keep an Airbus flyable for 30 plus years. Whats the average age in the airlines 10 years not counting NW. Who has the oldest 330's now and how are they doing. You can tell there wasn't any guys with mx/logistics experiance in the selection team.
I would help you but it is not in the contract
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:56 pm



Quoting Curt22 (Reply 18):
Make no mistake, there WILL be more major hurricanes and all points of hurricane ally on the Gulf Coast get hit sooner or later.

Don't ask what will happen to Boeing and the rest of Seattle if Mt. Rainier ever lets go...  Sad
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13966
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:17 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Thread starter):
Will Boeing also get another order of 21 more C-17s, bring the total USAF airplanes to 230?

The current order stands at what, 190? I think no fewer than 250 C-17s are needed, the USAF should retire the 30 worst performing C-5As and replace them with C-17s.

82 C-5Ms + 250 C-17s
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Venus6971
Posts: 1415
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:55 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:33 pm



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 17):
So what did the USAF do? They picked the aircraft that was the better deal for the AF. Good for them. I hope Congress stays the hell out of this decision, and that Boeing keeps its lawyers occupied elsewhere.

The USAF picked the better deal but now they have to get this through congress, the only state that likes this is Alabama so their contigent will not stick a spit up the CSAF butt like the 49 other states. Yes we have other foreign military contracts but nothing this big, the USCG Dauphins and Falcons are small potatos to this. This is equalivent to and CVN or SSBN being built and the money takes out of US hands . Maybe we should just get out of the super power business. Boeing will more or less rid themselves of the machinery to build tankers and US contractors will stop building parts, this is not about who has the better acft it is about the industrial capability and national security. I am waiting until monday when all the congressman get back to their offices and chewing out some USAF ass. The USAF brass were not thinking big picture and its consequnces, they see a 50 year old 135 and a need to replace it so they go into the acft store of Airbus and Boeing to see what they can get, they chose the Airbus. Maybe a easy black and white decision but this teams or like a jury was given specific criteria not allowed to think outside that box.
I would help you but it is not in the contract
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:42 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 7):
At least one bone is likely to come from a more relaxed attitude to US purchases from Europe. None other than Thomas Friedman says so! For some reason Wiki wants him to be Friendman, I rather doubt it!  

What does it matter if the large orders are few and far between. They simply don't spend enough to make the market attractive. The US will acquire more C-17s than Europe will acquire A400s. It will probably acquire more tankers than Europe.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
bhmbaglock
Posts: 2489
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:51 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:44 pm



Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 25):
The USAF picked the better deal but now they have to get this through congress, the only state that likes this is Alabama so their contigent will not stick a spit up the CSAF butt like the 49 other states.

Very wrong here. WV and TX get significant production as well. Geography is such that MS and FL workers will also bea ffected both directly and indirectly - MS already has a significant EADS presence and they will back AL just as we backed them when needed. Engines are coming from NC and OH, NG is a CA company. Other states will also benefit from this contract. There will be a political storm and it will be rough, but it's nothing like 49:1 as you imply, not even close.
Where are all of my respected members going?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26587
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:45 pm



Quoting NorCal (Reply 11):
If Boeing loses the CSAR-X program then I don't think it is unreasonable to start questioning how long they will remain in the defense business.

Five years ago analysts said Boeing should shed their Commercial Airplanes business because "you can't make money selling to airlines". Now, BCA is making a mint.

Integrated Defense Systems has a slew of programs in service, in the works, and on the drawing boards. The world is not likely to get any quieter (unfortunately) in the next decade or two, so there will be demand for Boeing products at home and abroad.

Quote:
(Boeing) grew their defense business by acquiring others...

So did Lockheed and Northrup.
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:56 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Integrated Defense Systems has a slew of programs in service, in the works, and on the drawing boards. The world is not likely to get any quieter (unfortunately) in the next decade or two, so there will be demand for Boeing products at home and abroad.

They have a lot of legacy programs, nothing really new and it looking at their recent track record of losses, budget overruns and old rehashes it seems like they are really faltering.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
So did Lockheed and Northrup.

Yes but Lockheed in particular has done great. Look at the F-22 and F-35, very innovative products
 
Curt22
Posts: 334
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:43 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:51 pm



Quoting Thorny (Reply 23):
Don't ask what will happen to Boeing and the rest of Seattle if Mt. Rainier ever lets go...



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 20):
Well Mount St. Helen's could erupt and close the Boeing plant as well!

The reason I didn't mention risk from volcanoes is because there is NO risk to the Boeing plant at Everett Washington from volcanoes!

While there's no doubt that both of these volcanoes will erupt again someday, there are no geological studies to suggest ANY risk at all to the Everett area. Link to one such study is provided below

http://www.gis.smumn.edu/GradProjects/TropleT.pdf

Mt Rainier is more than 85 miles south east of Everett, Mt St Helen is nearly 120 miles south of Boeing's Washington plant.

All are welcome to make the feeble argument that Boeing's risk is greater than or equal to the hurricane risk of Brookley Field located right on Mobile Bay...but this argument fools no one.

Since 1900...no fewer than 30 major hurricanes have struck the Gulf Coast of the US. The names: Camille, Fredrick, Ivan, Opal, and Katrina are painful reminders of what these storms have done to the central gulf coast within in a few miles of Mobile in recent years.

In contrast...Mt St Helen has erupted once in the last 150 yrs and Mt Rainier once in the last 500,000 years and neither pose a threat to Everett which is simply too far away to be at risk.
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:09 pm



Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 3):
I think it is too far fetched to think Boeing is out of the business, just because they lost this (yet significant) tanker deal.

Boeing will stay in the military aircraft business, offering great planes with superb capabilities.

True enough. And please bear in mind that Boeing is very healthy financially with its commercial side. Northrop-Grumman, on the othe hand, can use the business they've won through the tanker competition because they don't have those huge airlinere orders to fall back on. I suspect, though I can't prove this, the government gave due consideration to the contracts Boeing and Northrop-Grumman have in house and noted that NG could use the business. It wasn't a make or break deciding factor, but I suspect it was a factor nevertheless.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
Blackbird1331
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:47 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:23 pm

If you go to the Boeing website and link to the Itergrated Defense Systems, you will find links to about 138 military/government related projects. I, too, wanted Boeing to win, but they did not.
Better luck next time.
Cameras shoot pictures. Guns shoot people. They have the guns.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4897
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:32 pm



Quoting Curt22 (Reply 30):
The reason I didn't mention risk from volcanoes is because there is NO risk to the Boeing plant at Everett Washington from volcanoes!

I think you are missing Yellowstone out  Wink If that thing ever blows again (and it could, its still active), most of the world would be at risk!
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9521
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:55 pm

Even if the Air Force wanted to throw Boeing a bone what would it be, more satellites, can't be a/c. The Air Force just publicy stated that the new tanker gives them more fuel, more cargo, etc etc. now which officer in their right mind is going to suggest more C-17's when you just went for a multi-purpose a/c? CSAR was given to Boeing and taken back and put out to bid again, the EH101 is now going to win that bid, EADS as a company can offer synergies, no bone there.
What the Air Force needs and has been fighting tooth and nail for is more F-22, so maybe Boeing can offer to help build them to lower the Air Force purchase price, now that would be progressive thinking by Boeing, catering to a clients needs.

To throw them a bone implies that the contract was not awarded on merits, that politics and economics was also a consideration, I don't think anyone in the Air Force want to get involved in that type of discussion.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26587
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:10 pm



Quoting NorCal (Reply 29):
Yes, but Lockheed in particular has done great. Look at the F-22 and F-35, very innovative products.

Boeing builds a third of the F-22, remember.  Smile

Quoting NorCal (Reply 29):
(Boeing) have a lot of legacy programs, nothing really new and it looking at their recent track record of losses, budget overruns and old rehashes it seems like they are really faltering.

And LM and NG are pinnacles of fiscal responsibility and temporal promptness.  Yeah sure Unless the F-22's problems are solely the fault of Boeing's third of the plane.  duck 

The KC-767 was late, but it has started deliveries. The Wedgetail program did have problems with the physical modifications to the 737 airframe, but many of the suppliers (including Northrup-Grumman and BAE) had serious issues getting their stuff to work and integrate, as well. But now the planes are mostly ironed out and deliveries are forthcoming.



Quoting Par13del (Reply 34):
The Air Force just publicy stated that the new tanker gives them more fuel, more cargo, etc etc. now which officer in their right mind is going to suggest more C-17's when you just went for a multi-purpose a/c?

Perhaps because the KC-45A cannot operate out of unimproved fields? It also does not offer direct-loading of out-sized cargo?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9521
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:17 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
Perhaps because the KC-45A cannot operate out of unimproved fields? It also does not offer direct-loading of out-sized cargo?

Agree with you on that Stitch, but the Air Force has been fighting against those in congress who have been trying to give them more C-17's, can they really go to bat now for more, even if the congress is lining up to get the a/c, the credibility of the air force will be shot to hell.
 
hawkercamm
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 4:15 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:19 pm



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 17):
In one of the locked tanker threads, someone noted that for the cost of one C-17, you could haul more cargo in that one aircraft than you could in two A-400's. And that the purchase price of two A400's was relatively equal to that of one C-17. So, it seems to reason that an Air Force can spend the same amount up front for x number of C-17's as then can for 2 time x number of A400's, yet realize a clear savings per pound of cargo carried, given that your personnel and maintenance costs are smaller when you have fewer aircraft to man and maintain

I think the C-17 and A400 are very very different aircraft and perform very different missions.... The 767 and 330 tankers are much more similar.

I'm sure the RAF would like to have more C17s. They want the A400s to replace the C130s.

Could C17s be replaced by military B747-800F's? (Apart from air-drop missions!)
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26587
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 8:00 pm



Quoting Par13del (Reply 36):
Agree with you on that Stitch, but the Air Force has been fighting against those in congress who have been trying to give them more C-17's, can they really go to bat now for more, even if the congress is lining up to get the a/c, the credibility of the air force will be shot to hell.

Never underestimate the power of Congresscritters to bring home the bacon, "image" be darned. Especially when they are up for election.  Smile

The USAF fought hard against the C-130J, yet close to 200 of them have been shoved down their throats thanks to the efforts of GA's Congresscritters.

So between Nancy Pelosi and Norm Dicks, amongst others, I think an additional USAF C-17 buy could very well happen even if the USAF does not exactly need it.

Then again, ol' Norm never was successful in getting the USAF to buy more B-2s...  taekwondo 



Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 37):
Could C17s be replaced by military B747-800F's? (Apart from air-drop missions!)

Funny you should ask...

Back when Boeing didn't own McD, they fought very hard against the initial C-17 purchase on the grounds that the 747-400F would carry a lot more cargo (including out-sized) then the C-17 for a great deal less money.
 
SP90
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 12:39 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 8:06 pm

I don't understand why Boeing didn't just use the 777 or 787 in the tanker bid. Was it a capacity issue on Boeing side like not able to turn out the numbers in time? Still this is not going to sink Boeing since they still have their civil business. Better luck next time i guess.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26587
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:15 pm



Quoting SP90 (Reply 39):
I don't understand why Boeing didn't just use the 777 or 787 in the tanker bid.


  • Boeing wanted to protect the 767 line.
  • The 777 is very popular right now, so availability could be an issue.
  • The 787 is immensely popular right now, so availability is definitely an issue.
  • There is no 787-8F available at the moment (though it is now an almost certainty).
  • Neither the 777 nor the 787 line can be stopped to be re-configured to become IATA-compliant. This means that the planes would need to be sent to IDS-Wichita to be converted. This makes KS happy, but adds complexity and cost and time.
  • Both the 777 and the 787 would need to be designed to support a tanker configuration while the 767 and A330 already have been converted.
  • The 787F would certainly peg the "risk factor" part of the criteria compared to the 767, 777 and A330.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:24 pm



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
But seriously, yes, I believe there will soon be an add on C-17 order to assuage the anger of the pro-Boeing crowd.

21 c-17s will hardly be a "bone" for the 100+ KC-X they just lost

Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):

good idea why don't we see just how many American jobs can be lost?  Yeah sure  Angry
So your happy that more Americans get to go home and tell there family they have to move because someone in France is get a big bonus? More kids will have to go hungry? More houses on the market? The stock market get more and more in a hole?

Most people on here don't give a crap because "what the hell its not me why should I care?"
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4897
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:29 pm



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 41):
21 c-17s will hardly be a "bone" for the 100+ KC-X they just lost

21 C-17s will come out at around $5.2Billion at list prices, give or take. That's significantly more than the guaranteed KC-45 contract NG/EADS just won (4 planes at $1.5Billion guaranteed).
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:42 pm



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 41):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
But seriously, yes, I believe there will soon be an add on C-17 order to assuage the anger of the pro-Boeing crowd.

21 c-17s will hardly be a "bone" for the 100+ KC-X they just lost

You are assuming that Congress will fund the entire buy. I think there is an excellent chance they won't. Especially if the Air Force doesn't throw that bone.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
mikesbucky
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:17 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:27 pm

I think this is a critical loss to Boeing and makes a successful 787 essential. Boeing may get a few C-17s, more because of the cancellation of the C-5A reengine program then the loss of the tanker contract, but they have no significant defense projects left. F-22s will finish production shortly, they lost the F32/35 competition, F-18E/F and EF-18 will not be long runs and they've basically conceded the bomber market (small as it is) to Lockheed. The eventual cost of the Darleen Druyen scandel could be the end of Boeing Military (or at least a reduction to a bit player). Boeing better get the 787 out the door and in the air or the whole company could be in trouble.
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:34 am



Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
Boeing builds a third of the F-22, remember.

Yeah I know I said they are always a subcontractor or offering rehashed designs. I miss the Boeing that gave us the B-17, B-29, B-52 etc. It seems like Boeing has lost their innovative step on the IDS side. The innovation we see with the 787 needs to find its way over to the IDS side, otherwise Boeing will be relegated to a subcontractor or a sub par defense contractor
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9521
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:46 am



Quoting NorCal (Reply 45):
Yeah I know I said they are always a subcontractor or offering rehashed designs. I miss the Boeing that gave us the B-17, B-29, B-52 etc. It seems like Boeing has lost their innovative step on the IDS side. The innovation we see with the 787 needs to find its way over to the IDS side, otherwise Boeing will be relegated to a subcontractor or a sub par defense contractor

Looking at it now that seems to be true, however, the truth is far from that simple. Boeing had problems getting all the a/c that you mention into service, seen many documentaries on Wings now the Military Channel.
Here's a question for you, if new technology is such in demand, why is the B-52 still flying, even if it is not going to be replaced, why not just dump the gas guzzlers?
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:54 am



Quoting Par13del (Reply 46):
Here's a question for you, if new technology is such in demand, why is the B-52 still flying, even if it is not going to be replaced, why not just dump the gas guzzlers?

The B-52 is so good at what it does, has proven to be very adaptable, and no one has ever come up with a better bomber. New technology isn't needed for the B-52.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9521
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:37 am



Quoting NorCal (Reply 47):
The B-52 is so good at what it does, has proven to be very adaptable, and no one has ever come up with a better bomber. New technology isn't needed for the B-52.

B-52's were shot down during the Vietnam war, do you really think the B-52 can survive where the defender has SAM capability, don't think Iraq counts. The B-52 was not designed to wait until the Air Force had total domination of the skies before being sent in to do its jobs, in a hostile environment the only weapon the BUFF could really deliver is cruise missiles from outside hostile terittory, is the BUFF the most effective missile carrier?
The B-2 is a viable bomber at night, the B-1 has speed at low level which gives it a chance to survive, whats the BUFF's strength as a bomber?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26587
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Will Boeing Get A "bone" From Usaf?

Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:44 am



Quoting Par13del (Reply 48):
The B-52 was not designed to wait until the Air Force had total domination of the skies before being sent in to do its jobs, in a hostile environment the only weapon the BUFF could really deliver is cruise missiles from outside hostile terittory, is the BUFF the most effective missile carrier?

That is why we send in the F-22 (sweep the skies of interceptors), the F-35 (sweep the ground of SAM sites) and the B-2 (dismember command and control and support infrastructure) before we we send in the B-52s to move mud.

As for Iraq "not counting", she was an active member of Operation Desert Storm back in 1991 and the did a decent job. Back then, it was the F-15 and the F-117 doing the initial "clearing and grading" of the Iraqi air defense system, so with the newer and better planes (F-22/F-35/B-2) leading the charge, it should be even more effective.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 48):
The B-2 is a viable bomber at night, the B-1 has speed at low level which gives it a chance to survive, whats the BUFF's strength as a bomber?

Payload. You can drop a lot of dumb or smart iron with a B-52.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: GalaxyFlyer and 5 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos