Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
For a "must win" program, you bid what you think the customer wants to spend and ignore what your underlings in engineering, production, planning, etc are telling you it will cost. Someone who worked on the Lockheed P-7 told me that "Back in the good ol' days, you bid low to win a contract and after a respectable period of time, you went to the customer and told him that you needed more money because the scope of the program was greater than expected plus he had asked for changes. He would moan and gnash his teeth and you reminded him that we had to keep track of those Russian subs so he grudgingly approved more money. With the P-7, when they said "those Russian subs are out there", the Navy said "All the Russian subs are in port because they can't afford to run them. Perform on the contract or we'll cancel for non-performance." That was in the 1990's but today the Russian and Chicom bogeymen should be enough to make the world safe for poor performing defense contractors.Boeing played foul with the KC-X/KC-46 bidding because they were desperate to get the contract instead of Airbus. By late 2020 it was reported they already lost 5 billion on this contract.
By that time the tanker still suffered from multple issues - does anyone knows if the tankers had most of these issues solved?
From what is reported that's not the only military/space program that suffered from delays and cost overruns.
It's really time someone swings the hammer and gets those programs back into order.
Fixed price contracts come with a lot of ifs, ands or buts. If the customer cooperates (maybe he's planning for a vice president position in industry after retiring from the DoD), then the government can take the blame for design changes, increased scope of work, schedule changes, etc and agree to pay more. In the case of the P-7 fixed price contract, the Navy decided to play hardball. The KC-46 may be too high profile and too expensive for the bureaucrats to bail it out.That may work for combat aircraft but not really for tankers. They offered a fixed price and the US defense department gladly accepted.
On the tanker tip, because they are used not too far from the fighting and because SAM ranges have gotten longer, the USAF is looking at low RCS tankers for future procurement. Some may well be drones.
View attachment 803055
Future Stealth Tanker Plans Tied To NGAD 6th Generation Fighter's Fate
Next-generation aerial refueling capabilities are also influencing USAF plans for a second tranche of Collaborative Combat Aircraft drones.www.twz.com
They may have "accidentally" discovered a previously unknown flaw in the system. Or this was a maintenance or pilot problem. There's simply too much unusual/strange and unknown in this tragic crash that took so many lives.
My phone isn't allowing awarding anything other than "like". Assume that "like" is an "agree".Jet crash disaster in South Korea marks another setback for Boeing
WASHINGTON (AP) — A machinists strike. Another safety problem involving its troubled top-selling airliner. A plunging stock price.
2024 was already a dispiriting year for Boeing, the American aviation giant. But when one of the company's jets crash-landed in South Korea on Sunday, killing all but two of the 181 people on board, it brought to a close an especially unfortunate year for Boeing.
The cause of the crash remains under investigation, and aviation experts were quick to distinguish Sunday's incident from the company's earlier safety problems.
Typical media BS ... get "Boeing" into the headline, no matter that their own story says that this can't be linked to any other mishaps. They don't say one word about airline maintenance, either, which is also a possible cause of this mishap.
I know its popular to blame Boeing for the weather when it rains, but Boeing did not cause this crash.
I have to admit that this announcement makes me nervous:
The Pentagon has awarded the long-awaited contract for the Air Force's Next Generation Air Dominance future fighter jet, known as NGAD, to Boeing, President Donald Trump announced Friday.
The sixth-generation fighter, which will replace the F-22 Raptor, will be designated the F-47, Trump said. It will have "state-of-the-art stealth technologies [making it] virtually unseeable," and will fly alongside multiple autonomous drone wingmen, known as collaborative combat aircraft.
"It's something the likes of which nobody has ever seen before," Trump said in an Oval Office announcement with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin and Lt. Gen. Dale White, the Air Force's military deputy for acquisition, technology and logistics. "In terms of all the attributes of a fighter jet, there's never been anything even close to it, from speed to maneuverability to what it can have [as] payload. And this has been in the works for a long period of time."
Boeing wins contract for NGAD fighter jet, dubbed F-47
The Air Force said Boeing's F-47 will fly by the end of President Trump's administration.www.airforcetimes.com
If it's been flying for 3-5 years, I'd imagine the bugs are probably worked out or on their way to resolution.
There will still be some bugs. No avoiding it.
But this is was very welcome news on Friday.