Posted on 06/06/2008 5:01:06 AM PDT by aviation_man
Northrop Grumman official said that the construction of a new Air Force tanker in Mobile, Ala., could have an economic impact in south Mississippi of more than $12 million annually.
Leroy Barnidge, vice president for state and local government relations in Melbourne, Fla., where Northrop's tanker program headquarters is located, spoke Wednesday to a Pascagoula civic club.
Northrop-EADS plans an aircraft assembly center in Mobile estimated to cost $600 million and create more than 1,000 jobs.
If the Northrop and EADS North America's joint tanker contract survives a protest by rival Boeing Co., Barnidge said a couple of hundred new jobs could come with the contract to Mississippi?
$12 Million??? Out of a $40 Billion dollar deal only 12 million is staying here? heck fire a couple more air force generals.
Hangars?
Air Force never used B-52 because old B-17’s hangars were to small for B-52?
Boeing never mentioned that problem while selling the C-17 to Air Force as C-141 replacement. You know footprint of a C-17 is heaver than C-5 Galaxy one. Poor tarmac ...
And here you can read what numbers the DoT got for B-767.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jun2008/gb2008062_062876.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe+index+page_top+stories
Concrete and hangars are cheaper than aircraft aluminum or fuel.
Y’all might read the article a little more closely before jumping to conclusions. That’s the impact in south *Mississippi* from the plant in Mobile *Alabama*.
“Y’all might read the article a little more closely before jumping to conclusions. That’s the impact in south *Mississippi* from the plant in Mobile *Alabama*”
Where is the bulk of the money going? Its going to Airbus, is Airbus going to build the planes in the US?
The aircraft will be assembled in Mobile from components built all over the world, just as the 767-based tanker would be assembled from components built all over the world
“The aircraft will be assembled in Mobile from components built all over the world, just as the 767-based tanker would be assembled from components built all over the world”
So they’ll assemble the airplanes for 12 million? Pretty good deal if you ask me.
well the Buff used old B-36 hangars and they do fit in them, as for the C-17 they fit right along where c-5’s taxi park and hangar space. Sorry but i have worked on both along with other aircraft.
I think you know that the C-17 III was a replacement for the C-141 and the C-5 fleet is still operating. The C-17 puts far more pressure on tarmac than any Galaxy. C-5’s main landing gear has 28 wheels; C-17 only 14.
(MTOW C-5: 840,000 lb, MTOW C-17: 585,000 lb)
I wrote about a B-17 with a wingspan of about 100 ft and 19 ft height and not about a B-36 with over 160 ft and 45 ft height (B-52 40 ft). How many B-36 you get in a hanger designed for B-17? OK, the B-29 is ...
What do you think. Will KC-45 operate from bases together with C-17? Starlifter’s height was 40 ft. C-17 height is 55 ft and KC-45 is 57 ft.
My opinion: Don't limit Air Force because of old hangars.
How expensive is a hangar compared with an aircraft? How many hangars already need to be replaced...
its a french made P.O.S. we should buy the best tanker which is made by Boeing period. the contract called for a medium plane to fit in the same spots as the KC-135 so we would not have to repaint parking spots or taxi lines and no need for special hangars. How many hours have you spend working on airplanes. I’ll tell you along with other mechanics that they would rather bend wrenches on a Boeing built plane than a scarebus. Boeing has a better mc rate than scarebus. end of story.
Sure, the KC-767 is the best tanker for Boeing.
“The contract called for a medium plane to fit in the same spots as the KC-135 so we would not have to repaint parking spots or taxi lines and no need for special hangars.”
The A330-200 is rated same class as 767 but where in the final Request For Proposal (RFP) did you read that requirement for size you mentioned above?
What expensive paint does Air Force use for lines?
You can use the same “special hangars” as you need for C-17.
“Boeing has a better mc rate than scarebus. end of story.”
Says who? Boeing? The same company claims its 767 is 24 % more fuel efficient than a A330?
Well the Department of Transportation (DoT) has other numbers.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jun2008/gb2008062_062876.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe+index+page_top+stories
How many hours have you spend working on airplanes.
Many and your are trying to solve a discussion over authority and not over arguments and facts. Nice try. Do you work for Boeing?
“its a french made P.O.S. we should buy the best tanker which is made by Boeing period.”
“Sure, the KC-767 is the best tanker for Boeing.”
best tankers are made by boeing. besides did the french let boeing bid on there tanker request NO.
“The contract called for a medium plane to fit in the same spots as the KC-135 so we would not have to repaint parking spots or taxi lines and no need for special hangars.”
The A330-200 is rated same class as 767 but where in the final Request For Proposal (RFP) did you read that requirement for size you mentioned above?
think not. wing span 197 ft, will not fit in most air force hangers 767 does at 156 ft of wing. repainting is nothing its the loss of parking spots due to the size and safe distance between wing tips, also more fire dept equip will required due to the size.
What expensive paint does Air Force use for lines?
You can use the same “special hangars” as you need for C-17.
nope wing on a c-17 is 174 ft. they fit in c-5 and buff hangars. or old 141 hangars.
“Boeing has a better mc rate than scarebus. end of story.”
Says who? Boeing? The same company claims its 767 is 24 % more fuel efficient than a A330?
mc rate is maint mission capable rate has nothing to do with fuel burn and the scarebus is a HOG.
Well the Department of Transportation (DoT) has other numbers.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jun2008/gb2008062_062876.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe+index+page_top+stories
bull caca More EAD KOOL AID and LOTION
How many hours have you spend working on airplanes.
Many and your are trying to solve a discussion over authority and not over arguments and facts. Nice try. Do you work for Boeing?
not talking model airplanes real world bombers or airlift aircraft or even airliners. no i do not work for Boeing. I work on USAF aircraft. and yes they are BOEING BUILT. Not some french POS with a Northrup name on it. They are built in America for american defence.
you should read this post also relates to overall costs.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2030331/posts.
the scarebus is not the right tanker for the USAF. get over it. quit putting the lotion on and drinking the Kool aid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.