$40 Bil Air Force Boeing Tanker Lease Program.

reply to post by Zaphod58


does your counting include all c-135's....or just the k's?

That's just the KC-135s. The $1.1B contract to Boeing was only for KC-135s. That didn't include the very few (if any) remaining C-135s, RC-135s, or any other -135 variant.

thanks....i dont know how much it costs to keep the r's flying.... i know the upgrade is 190mil....i dont know if it has the airframe cost in it........(per aircraft)

They spent $1.4B to keep the 17 Rivet Joint aircraft flying through 2018, but I'm not sure yet if that included PDM costs, or if that was just upgrades to the CFM-56 engine, new nav systems and glass cockpits. I'm still digging into other sources to try to find out more info on how much it costs for the different variants.

the glass cockpits are okay....nothing too fancy up there....the engines were added between 98-2000....i like those....i've heard stories about the old engines....not so great.....

The big thing with the glass cockpit is that it makes it a lot easier on the pilots to read the instruments among other things. One of the things with the CFM-56 is that they will save about $1.5B in fuel and other savings, plus they can operate at 40,000 feet instead of the current 35,000 out of 8,000 foot long runways, instead of the 10,000 they need with the TF-33.

I like the idea of mixing mineral oil with jp5. The particles will be finer in our atmosphere than barium, and almost healthy to breath. It should have a sufficient impact for Global dimming warming, whatever is under the hood there, to expedite the melting of all the ice on earth making the easy extraction of minerals to perpetuate the Global Military / Industrial Complexies for another 50 years.

Hail to the Chiefs! Who will be long gone before the Sheite hits the fan.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The big thing with the glass cockpit is that it makes it a lot easier on the pilots to read the instruments among other things. One of the things with the CFM-56 is that they will save about $1.5B in fuel and other savings, plus they can operate at 40,000 feet instead of the current 35,000 out of 8,000 foot long runways, instead of the 10,000 they need with the TF-33.

Zaphod,

I agree 100% about the ease of display of the EFIS system. I also think having the information needed at that moment displayed, as opposed to tons of constant gauges and instruments, is a huge benefit. Maybe the AF will explore the Pratt and HEICO PMA options for the CFM56 maintenance.