A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Boeing Set For Huge Profits From Tanker Deal



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 2nd 03, 09:28 PM
ZZBunker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Boeing Set For Huge Profits From Tanker Deal

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I'm very out of date on KC-135's, but in my time, there were 4 crew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.
Since nobody but Boeing or the Military understand
the words "Standby".
  #2  
Old July 2nd 03, 09:28 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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I'm very out of date on KC-135's, but in my time, there were 4 crew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?

Since nobody but Boeing or the Military understand
the words "Standby".


You might want to contact some fire fighters.


  #3  
Old July 4th 03, 03:18 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA and ATC Privatization Chip Jones Instrument Flight Rules 139 November 12th 03 09:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.