Overbudget & Behind Schedule: New Air Force One Update
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 08. 2024
- Most viewers will already know that the US Air Force is planning to replace its two existing Air Force One aircraft with newer, modern replacements. Technically designated as VC-25As, the two jumbo jets that are currently flying the US president will be replaced with a pair of VC-25Bs. The former are based on the Boeing 747-200 while the latter are modified 747-8i aircraft.
Articles:
simpleflying.c...
simpleflying.c...
simpleflying.c...
simpleflying.c...
Our Social Media:
/ simpleflyin. .
/ simple_flying
/ simpleflying. .
Our Website
simpleflying.com/
For copyright matters please contact us at: legal@valnetinc.com
Behind and over-budget. So everything is going normally.
They aren’t just building another airline aircraft!!!!
@@johnp139 yes but it’s the government. So between the kick backs, the over pricing and the sheer incompetence it’s late and overpriced
747 been produced since 1970 and people at the plant cant figure out which jacks are the correct ones to use?
That was the clowns at San Antonio that can not figure it out.
Ultimately, I believe that Boeing is now using clever accounting to shift some operating losses to the program, for two main reasons; 1. Tax incentives, and 2. An excuse to push back the project and prioritize more urgent ones, such as the 777-X. Boeing lost a lot of skilled workers during the pandemic, and hasn't quite been able to replace some of them, and this is the untold part of their story.
Yes, I can imagine the pandemic cost them some workers and you can't go to Walmart and get some new ones. However, AF1 is a one off and I'll bet part of this has been supply chain issues and inflation. Using an entirely new airframe for two jets isn't practical. Even if the Boeing 747 line was still running, they would've had to pull these out and build them in a secure facility etc. All the workers have to have clearances, etc, etc. This is a lot of the reason it costs so much more aside from all the fancy stuff.
@@henrivanbemmel Boeing already has military arm in place, and engineers with security clearance. I don't buy the idea that supply chain issues can be holding up the completion of two aircraft. Supplies aren't that scarce. Boeing is exaggerating the cost overruns and delays to pad their books, and this unique project is a great way to do it.
Sure, the aircraft is going to have unique capabilities that most of us would never know about, but at 2 billion a piece, now basically 3 billion a piece, I simply don't think Boeing is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Perhaps, they are. I guess we see someday, although one would think with the oversight today, it would be harder to do that. Regardless, the plane will be great. Still, I think there is more to this than we think and I wouldn't be surprised if due to the pandemic delays that the SS or HS wanted more capability. I don't think the Boeing military wing is building 747 so the crossover may not be as easy.
@@henrivanbemmel Remember, the aircraft is not being built, it's being retrofitted for military use. Civilians built the aircraft for Transaero, but it's the secret military branch that is retrofitting the aircraft with features that would only be known to the military. I have no doubt that the finished product would be amazing, and I don't think that the government can demand changes to the aircraft while maintaining a fixed price.
The cost overruns seem exaggerated at this point, though I could be wrong.
@@sainnt I just watched a YT video on this issue. Now it can be taken for a grain of salt, but the deal was signed as a fixed cost of 3.9B or something in 2018 ... well before the pandemic. I think there have been enormous supply issues, labor issues, inflation issues since then. Furthermore, Boeing in an aviation news story today, walked away from doing a replacement for the 'Doomsday Airplane' as the USAF was demanding a fixed cost contract. Boeing, nor should any company, sign for fixed cost when the aircraft is 'new' or 'innovative' etc. There is no way any person is going to be able to forsee all the imponderables a decade hence. It costs what it costs and its better to be upfront about it. Trump said he saved the tax payers a couple of billion. Perhaps he did, but in the end the conversion cost about the same as two built from scratch given the circumstances. So, in the end due to a risk taken by then Boeing management, THEY are funding perhaps 30% of this project. We can be as cynical as we want, but if Boeing does not make money, it won't be there leaving only one major manufacturer of large commercial aircraft. That is not in the national interest. All the security stuff stems from 1. 22 Nov 63, 2. A world awash in weapons in the hands of people who should have never had to them. So, I feel we all have to pay for our collective irresonsibilities by absorbing such costs and putting up added scrutiny during travel and online. It never used to be like that.
If it were up to me, given an acceptable delivery of the planes, I would pay Boeing for its losses. I wouldn't tell them in advance, but such a contract is unreasonably burdensome given the crazy upheavals of the past 5 years. Just sayin'.
Beautiful bird can't wait to see it...
The new platforms will be extremely late. Boeing San Antonio can not even put together a lampshade, correct, on time, or on budget. That place is a toxic shit hole. The management there is vile to say the least.
Could you do a video about KLM fleet: history, present and future❤Love your work❤
This has been the worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever.
Well...your word is all I need. I totally agree.
Not for us taxpayers. I'm glad to hear Boeing is being made to eat the cost of their mistakes for once instead of passing them onto our grandchildren's taxes.
@@TheRestrictedgamer Boeing has made plenty of profit in the past. Pity they made a bad deal this time around but that's not our fault. No tears shed for Boeing here.
Shock horror a military project has gone way overbudget & very delayed. that's definitely never happened before
We should be waiting on a 400 replacement. The 200 should have been phased out by 2010. It becomes risky as these 747s became aged. Now on 34 years of age should have learned from TWA 800. Only a matter of time unless these elderly birds are replaced. Sure they are maintained but still the risk remains.
Excuses made for changing the livery to reduce cost...They fogot the contract was fixed priced 😑
Acquisition cost is like on 20% of the total lifecycle costs. Operation and Maintenance is the other 80%, which is where these additional costs occur. Get an education!!!
lol if they did good with their normal airplanes, even if they go over budget with their 2 billion per airplane,, they would be a ok! But with their current safety and structure, any losses are on them period
WSJ is longer to say than wall street journal!!!!
LMAO
Simply Flyingz needs to remember the strangely high $25 billion covid relief
Terrible progression. The Federal government and Boeing should work out their contractual agreement and get those aircraft airborne sooner rather than later. It will cost U.S. citizens a heck of a lot more nickeling and diming vice purchasing the required items and the Federal government pay for additional items outside the original contract! Retired U.S. Navy Veteran.
Airbus A380 would be a better, bigger, more modern aircraft to use as Airforce 1.
But the USA couldn't have the US President flying around in a European aircraft
So, Atlas Air's N863GT won't be the last queen to be delivered to a customer afterall :)
Man, I'd like to see an AIRBUS A380 version of AIR FORCE ONE
Haha yeah, but I think americas pride is too big to take a european aircraft to be Airforce One
@@zenalberga2339
Amen to that 😃🤣🤣🤣👍
One of the many stupid decisions Boeing has made in the last 20 years, good for the competition
It was always a mistake to ask Boeing to convert two existing (formerly Russian owned) aircraft to Air Force One standards. To the average guy on the street it might sound like a cost savings, but the Air Force and Boeing new it was a bad idea. Presidential aircraft are almost entirely different inside the skin of the fuselage, plus there are "added features" (classified) that are not common to commercial aircraft. There was only one guy involved who thought this approach was a good idea and he is out of office now. The actual cost of the aircraft is going to much higher than if they had just started from scratch in the first place. Too bad Boeing's former CEO didn't have the guts to "just say no" as Mrs. Reagan used to suggest.
They were never "Russian owned". The airline who ordered them went out
of business before they were delivered. Boeing had them "on the lot".
OK, "Russian ORDERED" aircraft. The planes were completed to the specs of a defunct Russian Airline and not to MIL-SPEC standards. Turning "sow's ears" (commercial a/c) into "silk purses" (military a/c) is possible but not efficient or even sensible. @@michaelrmurphy2734
I may be biased, but I was looking forward to the Trump livery for AirForce1. The current livery is terribly dated. Trump got the fixed cost out of Boeing, so his livery should stand.
I think Trump is a you know what, but that paint job DOES look good.
But you see where it comes from, right? Dark blue, a stripe of red and white?
How does he dress all the time when he is not on the golf course?
I think the classic AF1 livery is iconic for it and should stay. I don't have anything against Trump's livery idea but change just to change doesn't really justify it.
Delivery.
Losses are all good PR.
Boeing is sliding more and more backward in all respects compared to Airbus. I would not be surprised if the Boeing contract was cancelled and transfered to Airbus.
this is USAF and THE US government here lol they wont ever go Airbus and only go Domestic which is only Boeing lolol
I blame the orange guy.. should have been custom built considering all the mods
In many of these technical jobs where it is a one off with competing agendas the quoted price is too low and the delivery dates too soon. They do this to get the deal, but then there are these overruns and delays, because well ... life is life. They aren't lazy or stupid, it just takes what it takes coupled in this case with the fallout of the pandemic. It'll be a wonderful airplane, let's let them finish it properly. This constant need to hold folks publically accountable in many cases for matters beyond their control gets really old. Few of us could withstand such scrutiny. Budget crunchers and marketers always seem to think they can change the laws of physics/engineering by their arbitrary constraints. Honesty would be a better policy in my view.
I still don't get why they haven't opted for a completely new airframe, rather than an existing one? they basically had to completely strip the aircraft and start from scratch, as if it was a completely new aircraft. this then put the cost up more than the original price as. yes it didn't cost the taxpayers anymore but it cost boeing a lot more than they bargained for. In truth, i am looking forward to the end result.
That's because of the costs, new 747-8Is would have cost much more than these undeliverd ones
@@hannesm.6054 that may be true, but the costs keep on going up as the plane get more and more delayed. They may as well have bought a completely new airframe to get things done easier and faster, just as they did with the VC25A's they where delayed too but not as long as the new ones are. Plus they could have added a refueling probe too. This one cannot as it wasn't added, as this ones a civil rather than military airframe.
As with a lot of decisions the boeing beancounters have been making recently, they have been aimed at saving money however they end up being fundamentally flawed and costing more in the long run. Very sad
You think Boeing will build two new planes now that the line has been shut down?
Starting with two existing airframes made sense. How about secondhand B777s?
@@michaelrmurphy2734 They could have build them before the line shut down? They where also thinking of replacing the four doomsday planes. But that isn't possible now unless they find more used 747 platforms they can build on.. 🤔
Imagine if they made a new smaller airframe from scratch that could go supersonic was lean and cost less. Hopefully booms overture will be added to the fleet in the future.
0 chance for that
That wouldn’t meet the requirements.
Let’s see if it will be ready for trump! He did a great deal with them
I think it'll be delivered just in time for President Trump to use it when he's re elected😂.
We need Trump back in there to get the cost down, and the build time decreased.
This was a terrible deal in many ways
Fantastic deal, all Boeing’s shenanigans are coming back to bite them
Trump bullied Boeing to get that price and wanted the plane in service immediately
Shut up....quick blaming Trump you ignorant F@#!
How can that small amount of dark blue (Trump's Livery) possibly cause heating issues? (I know dark colors absorb heat) Air New Zealand's entire fleet is painted all Jet Black (pun intended) yet they seem to operate just fine.
Well, who would attack a air new zealand plane out of the blue? Did that ever came to your mind? I don't think you even know how AF1 works
Trump wanted the colors of the American flag? No, Trump wanted the colors of his suits!
I liked that livery and I think it would've looked really nice as our Air Force One fleet livery.
But yes I agree with you. That's the color of his suits, not the color of the flag.
When I saw Air Force One (Trump's Version) paint scheme I thought
that looks cool too. And airlines change colors all the time.
But whatever. Its up to the operators to choose the paint, not me.
Dark blue, stripe of red (tie) and a white shirt? Its what he wears...
Jackie O is better at choosing colors than trump. Way, way better
Hi
hi
Henlo :)
Only 3 years late, but there still doing better than the 777X. Way to go Boeing, they should have ordered 2 a350's like other countries did.
No. The American head of state will fly in an American built aircraft, TYVM. I’d rather overhaul the current VC-25As than send taxpayer dollars to Airbus.
I think eventually Air Force One will be a twinjet.
Like paying those taxes, don't you? Airbus does it better.
Boeing is a welfare bum! All the military contractors live off YOU!
@@michaelrmurphy2734either a 777X or a 787
the US Air Force would probably never have an Airbus
(Except for the A330 MRTT that was never delivered)
Boing is a failed company
The biggest waste of taxpayer money their is, but as usual, they don't care.
Their? Moron
No,these upgrades are desperately needed,new electronic warfare capabilities,new medical equipment,and updated communications.
@@galvinstanley3235 Yeah, in other words wasted money.
Bravo Trump just another example of a great business deal done right.
He messed so many things up.
american government must to use Airbus aircraft to design president airplane called airforce 1! much more reliable
No one wants to hear the annoying hydraulics during taxiing!!!
@@johnp139you know Airbus is doing really well if the sound of hydrolics when taxiing is the main criticism.