Re: What are Boeing's plans?

[David Lednicer]

Here is an interesting question: the USAF KC-767 deal was supposed to keep
the 767 line open, but this deal is dormant. If the USAF doesn't act soon,
they won't be able to buy 767s as the line closes real soon. With this
in mind; how are they going to buy E-10s (767-400ERs) if the line is closed?

[Kevin Brooks]

"David Lednicer" > wrote in message
...
> Here is an interesting question: the USAF KC-767 deal was supposed to keep
> the 767 line open, but this deal is dormant. If the USAF doesn't act
> soon,
> they won't be able to buy 767s as the line closes real soon. With this in
> mind; how are they going to buy E-10s (767-400ERs) if the line is closed?

From what I have read, the E-10 concept is not completely locked into the
767 platform--the first operational test and eval aircraft will be a 767
platform, but no firm decision regarding later procurement has been made. If
Boeing wants to continue to pursue the 767 tanker option, it has the ability
to temporarily kill the line and restart it later, as long as they keep the
tooling and jigs--there has also already been mention made of possible 7E7
use in the E-10 role, and more remotely as a future tanker platform.

Brooks
>
>

[William Wright]

"Kevin Brooks" > wrote in message
...
>
> "David Lednicer" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Here is an interesting question: the USAF KC-767 deal was supposed to
keep
> > the 767 line open, but this deal is dormant. If the USAF doesn't act
> > soon,
> > they won't be able to buy 767s as the line closes real soon. With this
in
> > mind; how are they going to buy E-10s (767-400ERs) if the line is
closed?
>
> From what I have read, the E-10 concept is not completely locked into the
> 767 platform--the first operational test and eval aircraft will be a 767
> platform, but no firm decision regarding later procurement has been made.
If
> Boeing wants to continue to pursue the 767 tanker option, it has the
ability
> to temporarily kill the line and restart it later, as long as they keep
the
> tooling and jigs--there has also already been mention made of possible 7E7
> use in the E-10 role, and more remotely as a future tanker platform.

There are still 24 767s in the announced backlog which keeps the line open
until at least the end of 2006 though I would guess some parts of the supply
chain would shutdown sooner. I have never heard of any plans to mothball any
line at Boeing and don't really see how it could be done.

And of course the last 757 is in final assembly now.

>
> Brooks
> >
> >
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

William Wright wrote:

> There are still 24 767s in the announced backlog which keeps the line open
> until at least the end of 2006 though I would guess some parts of the supply
> chain would shutdown sooner. I have never heard of any plans to mothball any
> line at Boeing and don't really see how it could be done.
>
> And of course the last 757 is in final assembly now.

Is this an example of the 'healthy order book' that another poster in this
thread referred to ?


Graham

[David Lednicer]

I wish I was half as optimistic as you - I see the J-STARS fiasco
happening all over again. In that case, the DoD thought that they could
wait forever to order 707 airframes to use as E-8Bs. They ordered one
and Boeing told them to hurry up and order the others - or else. The
DoD didn't believe them and Boeing shut the 707 line down. Boeing
either refused to reopen it or quoted huge reopening costs - the end
result being that the DoD was stuck with the one white elephant E-8B
they had bought and no other airframes. The DoD ended up trading the
E-8B to Omega for a pile of worn-out 707-320Cs. The DoD then paid
Northrop Grumman a fortune to rebuild them so they could be used as
E-8Cs. Now, they are complaining that the JT3Ds on the aircraft are
getting very difficult to maintain, so they will have to reengine them.
They could have had new 707 airframes, with new CFM56 engines (ala'
the E-8B), if they had just done things right.

I also have trouble believing that the E-10 will be easily platform
independent. A lot of engineering goes into creating a system such as
the E-10. You can't just plug and play with a different airframe
without spending huge piles of money. And if they were going to move
from the 767-400ER airframe, what will they use? The bigger, longer
range 7E7 won't be available in time. The only choice will be used
767-400ERs. At least these will be younger than the 707s that the E-8Cs
were built from.

[Kevin Brooks]

"David Lednicer" > wrote in message
...
>
> I wish I was half as optimistic as you - I see the J-STARS fiasco
> happening all over again. In that case, the DoD thought that they could
> wait forever to order 707 airframes to use as E-8Bs. They ordered one and
> Boeing told them to hurry up and order the others - or else. The DoD
> didn't believe them and Boeing shut the 707 line down. Boeing either
> refused to reopen it or quoted huge reopening costs - the end result being
> that the DoD was stuck with the one white elephant E-8B they had bought
> and no other airframes. The DoD ended up trading the E-8B to Omega for a
> pile of worn-out 707-320Cs. The DoD then paid Northrop Grumman a fortune
> to rebuild them so they could be used as E-8Cs. Now, they are complaining
> that the JT3Ds on the aircraft are getting very difficult to maintain, so
> they will have to reengine them. They could have had new 707 airframes,
> with new CFM56 engines (ala' the E-8B), if they had just done things
> right.

The focus for the E-10 as of now is getting the systems integrated; the
airframe is apparently of secondary concern, from what I read earlier. E-10
is not showing up anytime real soon, remember.

>
> I also have trouble believing that the E-10 will be easily platform
> independent. A lot of engineering goes into creating a system such as the
> E-10. You can't just plug and play with a different airframe without
> spending huge piles of money. And if they were going to move from the
> 767-400ER airframe, what will they use? The bigger, longer range 7E7
> won't be available in time.

Yeah, it would be available. NG is not required ot have the E-10
demonstration radar completed until around 2010, according to the AFA (
www.afa.org/magazine/july2004/0704world.asp ); 7E7 first flies in 2007.
Globalsecurity.com says that the delivery to the USAF is currently scheduled
for 2012, which might slip by two years.

The only choice will be used
> 767-400ERs. At least these will be younger than the 707s that the E-8Cs
> were built from.

Maybe all of this is why the USAF has only committed to the 767 for the
single test and eval airframe as of yet.

Brooks

>

[Fritz]

David Lednicer > wrote:

> With this
> in mind; how are they going to buy E-10s (767-400ERs) if the line is closed?

Dismissed ones ?

--
Fritz