It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FredT
The second DreamLifter was actually tractored onto the runway and then pushed to the very end of the runway before it started engines and took off. I suspect its turning ability is pretty poor? and it needs alot of the runway for sure.
...assume its empty when its lifting off at Paine.
Originally posted by FredT
reply to post by Harlequin
I did actually. Boeing has become an assembler these days. Create the concept then farm out the logistics, design, and assembly. Im betting it was much cheaper to do this this way than in house.
Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by weedwhacker
read a blog from boeing which explains why they didn`t do the work themselves - and its quite sound really:
to build the dreamlifter as a manufacturer they would have to build it from new, which would require would require them to certify a new aircraft type , build prototypes , crash test , destruction tests etc etc - all for a few aircraft;
so by outsourcing to a seperate company to convert the airctaft they can skip the entire `new build` process as its a special conversion of an existing aircraft