![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
want to trade 601 plans for 701 plans | [email protected] | Home Built | 0 | January 27th 05 07:50 PM |
Unused plans question | Doc Font | Home Built | 0 | December 8th 04 09:16 PM |
What are Boeing's plans? | David Lednicer | Military Aviation | 62 | September 27th 04 12:23 AM |
Modifying Vision plans for retractable gear... | Chris | Home Built | 1 | February 27th 04 09:23 PM |
Here's a silly question regarding plans | David Hill | Home Built | 21 | October 8th 03 04:17 AM |