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
|
|||
|
|||
"ZZBunker" wrote in message om... "Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ... "ZZBunker" wrote in message om... Ron Parsons wrote in message ... In article nk.net, "Robert A. Fowler" wrote: What is the offset expense of maintaining and operating the 136 aging Boeing KC-135E aircraft ? - Fewer aircrews (5 people x 100k/year x10 years + 5m training cost + 2 crews per airframe) = 30 Million$ for each kc-135 eliminated ~$1.08 Billion savings in aircrew alone. 136 vs 100. I'm very out of date on KC-135's, but in my time, there were 4 crew members and it took 6 crews to hold down and aircraft. In more recent times, there were 2 or 3 crew on a B-767 and if you add a boomer, you are back up to 4, but it still takes 6 crews to hold down an aircraft. But, that's also why Boeing is going down the tubes. What are you gibbering about? Nothing a NASA contractor would understand. That wouldn't include me, but your post came on the same day Boeing sold another 100 airplanes. I fail to see how Boeing is going down the tubes. Since nobody but Boeing or the Military understand the words "Standby". You might want to contact some fire fighters. I already have, since fire fighters don't anything but standby the valve. Which is why most of them aren't paid as much as pumpers. Standby for BLM firmen pays about 1/3 as much on standby. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 139 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |