Trump to nix new Air Force One planes

Does the opening post of this thread say $ 4 Billion dollars.
















For that much money . . .


































What are we talking about here?


Mike Grouchy

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: burgerbuddy

The existing aircraft first flew in 1986. That's a lot of years on any aircraft. The cost really isn't that high for two aircraft. As for guarantees, that's why they're doing risk reduction contracts. Boeing currently has three contracts to develop technologies for the replacement aircraft, that will then drastically reduce the chance of their being problems when they finally start the EMD phase. They also will probably go fixed price when they finally do pull the trigger on the final contract.

I remember when Reagan got the planes, yeah, they are old.

Well, I hope the price stays low.

The B-1 costs a billion each don't they?

Think it would be too provocative if AF-1 was built like one of them? All black and angley with gold lettering.



ETA; planes that are nuke capable should be hardened against the bomb, nowadays, right?

So the tech and systems are off the shelf right?

Maybe use the Concorde design and make AF-1 supersonic?

a reply to: mikegrouchy

List price for a 747-8 is $360M. Then you have to add interior modification cost, defensive system costs, and related engineering and development costs. Since it's only two planes, those costs aren't spread out like they would be for other aircraft. Current estimates of the final cost are $3.6-3.9B, but that may come down as development goes on.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

The most expensive aircraft in the inventory right now is the B-2. The flyaway cost was $737M per airframe in 1997 dollars. It would have been cheaper, if they had gone with the original plan, but since they cut them down to 21, it drove the costs way up.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: burgerbuddy

The most expensive aircraft in the inventory right now is the B-2. The flyaway cost was $737M per airframe in 1997 dollars. It would have been cheaper, if they had gone with the original plan, but since they cut them down to 21, it drove the costs way up.

Yep, same as ordering 100 cig lighters with my logo compared to 100,000.

lol.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

That's part of what is happening here. All the engineering and development costs are only being spread across two aircraft, which means costs are going to be high, no matter what they do.

a reply to: Edumakated

Funny part is the cost is just short if 4 billion. The defense department set up the contract with 2.9 billion for research over the next 5 yrs. But then you still have to buy the plane's they will easily be over 500 million each.

So Trump is right the cost is outrageous. They done have to redesign the whole aircraft so spending 2.o billion on research seems outrageous to me.

a reply to: dragonridr

You don't just slap a high end EW suite onto a 747 and expect it to work. Or all the telephones and communications systems, or an in flight refueling system. They also have to have triple redundancy to meet military standards. They're not redesigning the aircraft entirely, but they're making huge changes to it. The current VC-25 is a 747-200 in name only with all the changes they have made to it, the same as the upcoming aircraft will be 747-8s in name, but a mechanic working on them wouldn't recognize a lot of the interior portions of them.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: burgerbuddy

That's part of what is happening here. All the engineering and development costs are only being spread across two aircraft, which means costs are going to be high, no matter what they do.

Well yes but would they have anything more than the B-2 has already?

I'm talking critical tech.

It's just a basic commercial craft frame with a lot of whistles and bangs which doesn't need any R+D or am I wrong.

I have no idea what's under the hood of AF-1 or the B-2 but it would seem to me that they would need about the same in terms of communications and defences.

I'm gonna stop now before I dig myself a deeper hole.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

The KC-46 is a 767, but it's not just a commercial airframe with bells and whistles. For starters, military aircraft require triple redundancy in all major systems, where commercial aircraft require double redundancy. That means they have to find a way to fit an entire other wiring system into the same amount of space. They have to test airflow to determine the best placement for the defense system antennas, and ejectors for the chaff and flare system, the antennas for the communications system, to minimize drag once they're installed. Then they have to plumb the in flight refueling system, so the fuel goes to all the tanks, and test it on the actual aircraft to ensure it doesn't leak or have any problems.

There's a lot of R&D that goes into this, even though it's a baseline developed aircraft.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Zaphod58

So Boeing knows they have thumb under their thumb so looks like they could charge what they would want. Another old business tactic. When really needed and desperate jack the price.

Do you think he could try to open it for bids again or is this an exclusive contract with Boeing?

Boeing says they don't make money on the planes, they do it for the prestige.

Ya right.

For stuff like that, it's an overall money loser.

You make money in production, not engineering. AF1 is essentially an engineering prototype. You aren't going to tool up and go into production making AF1's. It's going to be a one-off, which is always an ass pain. Worse, it's a classified one off with lots of TS crap in, which adds loads of cost you can't imagine. And a high profile military one off, which also adds in lots of component tracking and qc paperwork you can't imagine. It can't be allowed to # up because that's all you'll hear about in the news, so stuff like that also generally requires your senior teams and managers, and THAT'S another cost adder.

So, yah, it's a flying dog and pony show you're only going to build a handful of, ever. And it doesn't really cross over into your other product lines, so any r&d is also pretty much lost.

The best part is he sold all of his stock in Boeing over the summer. In fact, he liquidated ALL of his holdings as if he knew he was going to win and people would see it as a conflict of interest. I guess people were too busy yelling for tax returns to notice.

originally posted by: Zaphod58

There's a lot of R&D that goes into this, even though it's a baseline developed aircraft.

You also need that ejector pod where the President can be fired out the bottom, and the plane-to-plane abseiling rig so the President can transfer to another plane in-flight on a rope.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Zaphod58

There's a lot of R&D that goes into this, even though it's a baseline developed aircraft.

You also need that ejector pod where the President can be fired out the bottom, and the plane-to-plane abseiling rig so the President can transfer to another plane in-flight on a rope.

lol. Don't need no steenking tightrope!

"Get off my plane!"

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Its 4 billion for the airforce one program. Contrary to what some may think a program total is not the same as a single aircraft. Secondly considering the known as well as restricted options for airforce one I can see the cost for the plane being very high when everything is taken into account.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Immediately before Trump tweeted that, an article was posted with a quote from Boeing.

"Anyone who paid attention to the recent campaigns and the election results realizes that one of the overarching themes was apprehension about free and fair trade," Muilenberg said at the Illinois Manufacturing Association last week, as noted by Tribune columnist Robert Reed. Fair trade has helped Boeing, which prides itself on being America's largest manufacturing exporter.

"Last year, we delivered 495 737s from our factory in Renton, Wash., to customers around the world," Muilenberg continued, noting that a third of the planes were sent to China. "This phenomenon would have been unimaginable when I started at the company in 1985."

www.washingtonpost.com... fe1d291

So Trump was tweeting in revenge...

a reply to: Bedlam

I hate you.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Bedlam

I hate you.

lol that made my day.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mikegrouchy

List price for a 747-8 is $360M. Then you have to add interior modification cost, defensive system costs, and related engineering and development costs. Since it's only two planes, those costs aren't spread out like they would be for other aircraft. Current estimates of the final cost are $3.6-3.9B, but that may come down as development goes on.

As a veteran,
someone who loves the Military,
and highly values every post you make here
allow me to speak in the boot camp vernacular of my day
and save you, the Air Force, and the Pentagon some time.

**** warning to civilians *****
**** warning incoming harsh language ****




You goddamn fly boys are not gorram hearing me!
FOR four Billion I expect a gorram space ship or get the fork out.

This is not, I repeat is not, some gorram McCain Obama head fork bullsnip, this is the gorram 21st century.
If I wanted a gorram flying bus I could get a buch of C-5 Galaxy's for that price and drive the whole motor cade right up it's tail pipe with the motor still running.
And for 4 gorram Billion dollars I could get 17.8 of them, so I fly two everywhere, have 14 spares, and 1.8 for parts.

But this ... IS ... the ... GOR RAM ... 21st century!
AND ... FOR ... FOUR ... B I L L I O N DOLLARS
... I ... EXPECT ... A ... GOR RAM ... SPACE ... SHIP.


Now let me break it down for you ignorant mother forkers in the back who weren't listening, or still don't understand what I just said.

With a gorram SR-71 I can go A N Y W H E R E on earth in under an hour.
I don't need a gorram bus for my family if I can fly to the other side of Earth, have a meeting, and be home for GORRAM lunch.
If I wanted a gorram flying air command I would board a gorram AWACS.


YOU! Indicates one person listening specifically. YOU STAND UP! WHAT DID I JUST SAY.

/loud air crewman's voice
"YOU SAID YOU WANTED A SPACE SHIP SIR"
/end

THAts right. Sit down. Smarter than your entire chain of command, and the entire gorram private sector.


A space ship.

Now get back to work!
disMISSED!

***** END HARSH language *****


What is this, a parade, you guys want to build me a float, have me tossing out doubloons and beads, while I pay out 4 billion for your secret deck where you rotate out airmen in prestige assignments.


Ain't nobody got time for that.

:rage:
Mike Grouchy

a reply to: links234

He only 'needs' all that if hes a warmonger president at the helm of a warmongering establishment. God forbid an era of peace should 'breakout'.

Besides, open warfare with Russia and China is out and out suicide, "MAD" as you pointed out. The idea that the biggest factory for war (Boeing) should maintain his war chariot is not lost on the warmongers at Boeing, I'm sure.

They helped create MAD in the first place. They in fact create a more unstable world and higher possibility of armageddon by their very existence. They are quite literally MAD, I mean insane.