Posted on 01/19/2024 4:54:54 AM PST by Fish Speaker
EVERETT, Wash. — In the wake of Boeing’s KC-46A Pegasus topping $7 billion in losses, company officials have been eager to stem the tide of the tanker’s long-running woes — and resolve several critical issues that pose risks to its operations.
The Pegasus currently has six category 1 deficiencies, Air Force terminology for problems that could cause loss of an aircraft, injury, or death. Spending money to fix those issues has helped drive Boeing’s staggering losses on the program, and is a key reason why company officials have sworn off fixed-price development contracts like those that govern the KC-46A.
Work to address the tanker’s predicaments starts in the Seattle suburb of Everett, Wash., where Boeing builds the commercial 767 and converts it into the KC-46A tanker. In a recent tour of these facilities, Breaking Defense spoke with company officials about how they plan to fix several of the tanker’s pressing issues, as well as how the aircraft can evolve for future missions.
(Excerpt) Read more at breakingdefense.com ...
With all of the news about their issues with commercial aircraft, I thought this was interesting ...
____
Another new issue lady night if you haven’t heard
Video
Engine fire on Atlas Air Boeing 747 departing from Miami Airport
https://rumble.com/v47yhox-engine-fire-on-atlas-air-boeing-747.html
Is this the tanker that Boeing won the contract for, then lost because of kickbacks to Northrop, then somehow(?) won again?
Yes. We are also paying Boeing a fortune to build two new Air Force One 747-8’s (now out of production) when they could have just picked up a couple of used A380’s and remodeled them. Or better yet, buy one A380 with an all-economy configuration to to stuff the media into and the President can fly on a Gulfstream. :)
Boeing won the contract for the KC-46 with a fixed price bid.
Boeing’s been bleeding red ink over this.
They picked up a couple of used 747-8s, the cost of the airframes isn't the issue.
Weird bidding war. Northrop’s proposal was smaller and could land on more runways but Boeing’s was bigger and could haul more cargo but the real difference was the fuselage being an American Boeing rather than a European Airbus.
Air Force should have gone with the winner of the tanker competition instead of rigging and re-rigging it to give the contract to Boeing.
While that in itself is noble, Boeing knew they couldn't produce a plane on the level of efficiency as AirBus had proposed and hence the planes that have been coming out are junk. I mean, inspectors have found discarded tools within the walls and floors of the planes. How sad is that?
The KC-46 therefore hasn't been cleared to refuel anything outside the continental United States, and is now considered a stop gap until a better refueler can be made.
You ask how I know all this? I worked for a refueling squadron and I know a lot of the inside scoop on the piece of junk the KC-46 is. Bottom line, our KC-135 aircrews would love for the next generation tanker to be based on the current refueler's airframe but with updated components. They trust it, so far it still works, and it out performs the KC-46 in every way.
Like we have never fueled an A-10 or other slow mover successfully?
We have never had a fueling receptacle subject to water and ice?
Concentric tubes and their couplings and manifolds have always been something good to stay away from.
Never had an APU drain?
Kid stuff self-inflicted complexity. Boeing seems to have developed an inclination to modify beyond the base design's ability. Many of the 737 Max problems stem from an original airplane too low to the ground, stretched too long, making the tail subject to dragging resulting in high landing speeds. Modification taken beyond successful. The 737 design shares designs dating back to the 707, just look at the front end.
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.