PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on December 06, 2016, 09:37:28 AM
-
He tweets today:
"Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!"
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/12/06/trump-says-cancel-new-air-force-one-costs-out-control.html
-
Hard to believe a government project is out of control price wise.
Has a government contract ever came in on budget?
-
Hard to believe a government project is out of control price wise.
Has a government contract ever came in on budget?
Has a government contract ever not been modified?
-
With no more hours than the current fleet has on it there is no real need for an upgrade. The current ones have many many more years of life ahead.
-
$2 billion each, I agree, cancel the order.
-
$2 billion each, I agree, cancel the order.
Is that money already spent, or is that the new estimated cost?
-
Is that money already spent, or is that the new estimated cost?
From what I understand they are "only" a hundred or so million into it.
-
As long as Trump will analyze whether cancelling the order makes good sense in most respects, I give him a lot of credit for this.
-
They obviously need a replacement, but 4 billion for 2 aircraft is stupid.
-
They obviously need a replacement, but 4 billion for 2 aircraft is stupid.
Boeing is denying his $4B number. I wonder where he got his information and how accurate it is.
-
They obviously need a replacement, but 4 billion for 2 aircraft is stupid.
As far as a replacement, not really. These aircraft don't see the service of a 747 in airline service. Even if they were flown 1,000 hours a year each (which I seriously doubt, more like half that) then the airframes would only have 25,000 hours. And that's a relatively new airplane by airline standards.
This is yet another prime example of government waste spending that obscene amount for two aircraft.
-
It's not run like an airliner though, engines are routinely changed out and these AC must be extremely reliable requiring much more service than an airliner. The main reason for the new AC is that the existing ones are becoming a liability in maintenance, it's probably more a question of dispatch reliability than cost.
-
It's not run like an airliner though, engines are routinely changed out and these AC must be extremely reliable requiring much more service than an airliner. The main reason for the new AC is that the existing ones are becoming a liability in maintenance, it's probably more a question of dispatch reliability than cost.
I don't buy it. Their maintenance requirements are above what an airline requires, and a new airframe will have the same requirements. These 747-200's are low time low utilization airframes and are maintained above and beyond. Boeing still supports them, and the engine manufacturer (General Electric) still supports them.
This is just another case of a runaway military order. Right now this country is in a financial crisis and run away debt. Blowing $4 billion on two presidential airplanes is ludicrous.
-
I don't buy it. Their maintenance requirements are above what an airline requires, and a new airframe will have the same requirements. These 747-200's are low time low utilization airframes and are maintained above and beyond. Boeing still supports them, and the engine manufacturer (General Electric) still supports them.
This is just another case of a runaway military order. Right now this country is in a financial crisis and run away debt. Blowing $4 billion on two presidential airplanes is ludicrous.
You may be right, I don't know, but I do agree, $4 billion is ridiculous. Boeing is apparently saying that number is wrong.
-
You may be right, I don't know, but I do agree, $4 billion is ridiculous. Boeing is apparently saying that number is wrong.
Boeing is saying: 'We are currently under contract for $170 million'
but from what I understand, that $170 mil is for a design and feasibility study". That may not even cover any actual design work, much less any per-production work.
I will reserve judgement until I hear some real details.
-
Boeing is saying: but from what I understand, that $170 mil is for a design and feasibility study". That may not even cover any actual design work, much less any per-production work.
I will reserve judgement until I hear some real details.
Best course of action! Don't know if the cost includes design, purchase, spares, support and what-not.
I have to keep reminding myself the President-elect speaks figuratively, not literally, so who really knows what he meant. ;)
Interesting quote:
“The plane is totally out of control,” Trump said in a brief appearance in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York on Tuesday. “I think Boeing is doing a little bit of a number. We want Boeing to make a lot of money, but not that much money.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-06/trump-says-air-force-one-order-should-be-canceled-as-costs-rise
Wonder how much money should Boeing be allowed to make to be the "right" number?
Or - perhaps it was a response to Boeing's presidents comments concerning trade?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ct-boeing-china-trump-robert-reed-1206-biz-20161205-column.html
-
Best course of action! Don't know if the cost includes design, purchase, spares, support and what-not.
I have to keep reminding myself the President-elect speaks figuratively, not literally, so who really knows what he meant. ;)
Interesting quote:
“The plane is totally out of control,” Trump said in a brief appearance in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York on Tuesday. “I think Boeing is doing a little bit of a number. We want Boeing to make a lot of money, but not that much money.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-06/trump-says-air-force-one-order-should-be-canceled-as-costs-rise
Wonder how much money should Boeing be allowed to make to be the "right" number?
Or - perhaps it was a response to Boeing's presidents comments concerning trade?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ct-boeing-china-trump-robert-reed-1206-biz-20161205-column.html
Maybe twice to 3 times what a production one costs, at the max. So according to Wiki a 747-8 cost $357 million, so 2 would be $714 million times 3 would be $2.142 billion. That allows for a lot of graft and malfeasance.
-
Maybe twice to 3 times what a production one costs, at the max. So according to Wiki a 747-8 cost $357 million, so 2 would be $714 million times 3 would be $2.142 billion. That allows for a lot of graft and malfeasance.
I disagree. Nobody should be putting any limit on the amount Boeing should be allowed to make. But I take the position that what Trump meant (or should have meant) was that they are not going to make that money off of the US Government, because that would be malfeasance on the part of the governments procurement division. If they can find a buyer that is willing to pay them an astronomical amount for their planes, more power to them, but it ain't going to me be (aka the American taxpayer). And Trump is standing up for us.
-
Maybe twice to 3 times what a production one costs, at the max. So according to Wiki a 747-8 cost $357 million, so 2 would be $714 million times 3 would be $2.142 billion. That allows for a lot of graft and malfeasance.
No one ever buys a Boeing (or Airbus) at the listed factory price. It's usually closer to 50% of that number.
-
Maybe twice to 3 times what a production one costs, at the max. So according to Wiki a 747-8 cost $357 million, so 2 would be $714 million times 3 would be $2.142 billion. That allows for a lot of graft and malfeasance.
I believe Trump said the $4B was the cost of the program. Not the cost of the two airliners. Their hangars probably cost more that my $425/month, and the probably drink a little more fuel than my Bonanza. And I don't know what else the "program" expenses are. Does that count the cost of inf-flight refueling, or the C130s that follow AF1 to haul all those suburbans around?
I don't know where he got the number ($4B) nor do I know if that is a high, low, or logical amount. But I wouldn't automatically call it "graft and malfeasance". (Unless we were talking about Obama or Hillary). ;)
-
Maybe twice to 3 times what a production one costs, at the max. So according to Wiki a 747-8 cost $357 million, so 2 would be $714 million times 3 would be $2.142 billion. That allows for a lot of graft and malfeasance.
um, the VC-25A has a lot of modifications over a 747-200 used by the airliners. The air refueling system for one thing and all the fancy communications gear (and there is a LOT of it) (and no, I'm not including the escape module).
-
I believe Trump said the $4B was the cost of the program. Not the cost of the two airliners. Their hangars probably cost more that my $425/month, and the probably drink a little more fuel than my Bonanza. And I don't know what else the "program" expenses are. Does that count the cost of inf-flight refueling, or the C130s that follow AF1 to haul all those suburbans around?
I don't know where he got the number ($4B) nor do I know if that is a high, low, or logical amount. But I wouldn't automatically call it "graft and malfeasance". (Unless we were talking about Obama or Hillary). ;)
Boeing is currently under contract for $170 million "to help determine the capabilities of this complex aircraft". Are you fricken kidding me? Trump needs to keep shaking that tree, tons of money will fall out.
-
Rush talked about this today. He was saying that AF1 had an operating room on it plus nuclear fallout shielding and many other things that we never think of. He was also saying that Boeing was in tight with the Clinton's having made sizable donations to the Clinton Foundation and paying Bill for his overpriced (IMHO) speeches. Thinks he was just sending Boeing a message.
-
I wonder where he got his information and how accurate it is.
Like anything that comes out of this mouth.... first thing that comes to his brain.
Boeing and others are still trying to figure out how on earth, he arrived at that number.
-
I don't know where he got the number ($4B) nor do I know if that is a high, low, or logical amount. But I wouldn't automatically call it "graft and malfeasance". (Unless we were talking about Obama or Hillary). ;)
Typical of our political system--it's graft and malfeasance only when it's the other party.
-
Like anything that comes out of this mouth.... first thing that comes to his brain.
Boeing and others are still trying to figure out how on earth, he arrived at that number.
It doesn't matter where the number came from, or if it was pulled out of thin air (probably was). It sends a message, that it is no longer business as usual to f*ck over the taxpayer.
-
Typical of our political system--it's graft and malfeasance only when it's the other party.
Druyun was your hero?
-
Typical of our political system--it's graft and malfeasance only when it's the other party.
Not true, the hucksters need to be driven from both parties.
-
It doesn't matter where the number came from, or if it was pulled out of thin air (probably was). It sends a message, that it is no longer business as usual to f*ck over the taxpayer.
The message is what exactly... he's going to cut government spending.... would like to see him try cut the F-35 or the AF-1 costs, all the congressman from the states were this s**t is made will be up in arms.
-
The message is what exactly... he's going to cut government spending.... would like to see him try cut the F-35 or the AF-1 costs, all the congressman from the states were this s**t is made will be up in arms.
So? It's time someone reigned in pork spending.
Since when do we owe government contractors a blank checkbook?
-
I honestly don't think there has been much pushback on these contractors in a long time. The social justice warriors in charge now who have made their livings off the public teet have no clue how to negotiate an contract unless it involves a cost of living increase on their employment contract.
-
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2016/12/23/10-ways-donald-trump-can-cut-waste-our-advice-from-openthebooks-com/#4e8f9e5e52b9
-
^^^^^^Good stuff.
-
Great article.