Trump rips Boeing for cost overruns on new Air Force One, says 'cancel order'


#1

President-elect Donald Trump blasted Boeing on Tuesday for alleged cost overruns on a new fleet of Air Force One planes and called for the government to cancel the contract, saying the project price tag is “out of control.”

foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/06/trump-rips-boeing-for-cost-overruns-on-new-air-force-one-says-cancel-order.htm.html

Interesting. I remember reading when Boeing was working on building the new Air Force One.

On the one hand I think Trump has a point Boeing might be charging way to much for this airplane. Trump does own a/many(?) airplanes thus he has a rough idea on how much they should be. Further, he wants competition to help dictate the price. Granted Boeing has been the sole manufacture of these airplanes, but maybe another manufacturer can help lower the cost of this airplane.

On the other hand, Air Force One, probably has way more features(security) features than his airplane(s).

Thoughts…??


#2

He won’t be able to use his airplane without a major overhaul. I have no idea if the cost is reasonable or not. Obviously Trump doesn’t think so.


#3

CNNs Jake Tapper tweet seems to insinuate the President-elect was a bit perturbed at Boeing CEO.

This story in which Boeing CEO expressed concerns about Trump’s views on trade posted just before Trump tweet

twitter.com/jaketapper

Is a tweet-for-tat a thing?

Hmm, Boeings CEO may need to learn to the art of making deals. I bet once the two talk the President-elect will assure everyone ‘it’ll be great.’


#4

I wouldn’t want their plane now. They really don’t go ‘boing’.


#5

Cost overruns are par for the course for military equipment. And Air Force One qualifies. No one knows what it carries and what upgrades and/or modifications were planned. Anyway, this falls under the top secret category. Maybe someone explained that to the President-elect.

Ed


#6

I would sell all stocks having to do with sizeable government contracts.


#7

Seems Trump may have been pulling those numbers out of his backside. Boeing tweeted back that their current contract is only for $170 million for the month old contract. And even after everything is all said and done the contract will likely only be for $3 billion, not $4 billion. And that’s for two fully hardened, partially weaponized, secured Boeing 747-8’s. Planes the AF desperately needs to replace the now 30 year old VC-25’s that the president currently flies in that are at the end of their lives (average airliner age is 14 years by comparison). This isn’t some bloated wasteful expense, but a vital government expenditure to ensure the connectivity and safety of the President.

Just because Trump is deluded enough to think his bargain basement used 757 is somehow equivalent to AF1 doesn’t make it reality. I’d rather future Presidents (after 2024 when these new AF1s are supposed to go into service) don’t get shot out of the sky on international trips thank you very much.


#8

More like sell stocks of any company that dares to say anything critical of Trump. :rolleyes:


#9

So much for saving American jobs.


#10

Kind of curious how Boeing was the only bidder,how convenient for them.


#11

Considering there are only two large airliner mfgs, and Boeing is the only American one and only one producing a plane of the desired size… It’s not convenience, it’s simply a market reality.


#12

Boeing is the only American manufacturer of passenger jets large enough to fill the bill. Remember the 747-8 was spec’d: this is the stretch 747 that was specifically designed for long range flights. In other words, the top of the line long range aircraft Boeing sells. They’re not going to retrofit any of the military transport planes for this purpose, that would cost too much.

Airbus is only other maker of large enough passenger jets: do you think Trump is going to let any future American president ride in one of those?

If only smaller jets were okay, there’s a few other makers out there.


#13

Once upon a time, there were other airliner makers in the United States … Douglas, Lockheed, General Dynamics … but bit by bit they went out of that line of work.

Lockheed still makes the C-130 Hercules and did make the C-5. And the C-141. But they are designed for cargo and are kind of noisy for passengers.

Douglas did make the DC-8 and twin DC-9 series and later the C-17 for rough fields with mostly cargo, but they got acquired by Boeing and then the C-17 line was shut down by Obama; it was making one a month.

General Dynamics made the Convair liners including the twin CV-240, 340, 440, and 580 and the four engine 880 and 990, but the fuselage was too narrow and unpopular, so their sales went down and lost so much money, that they had to give it up.

Europe had similar problems. DeHavilland, for example, had the Comet. And Vickers VC-10. The Europeans consolidated several times and ended up with Airbus. They gambled with their latest the giant A380 … not working out. Sales have stopped. Wing cracks.

The Russians tried it with the IL-62 … a “copy” of the VC-10 , but in the end bought Boeing airplanes.

Even the Canadians gave it a go with an early four engine airliner.

The Chinese may be trying it now.


#14

Isn’t trumps own plane a Boeing 747? I wonder if he wants to keep that because air force 1 isn’t as fancy as his own plane.

I wonder why he tweeted a different cost than the actual cost. 4 billion doesn’t equal 170 million.


#15

It was probably something that was reported on Infowars or perhaps a 16 year old kid tweeted it.


#16

So all these different manufacturers, none of them could build the plane requested? I just read a story on the Newport News ship building yard, they build every size vessel and type you can think of, from aircraft carriers to submarines.What about Skunkworks,I have no doubt they could build just about any type of aircraft requested.

Its just curious how they are talking about such high overruns, but there was only one bidder for the job, I find it hard to believe there is no other aircraft manufacturer capable of building the plane


#17

Trump flies a 757 which is a newer airframe than the 747. Regarding the new Air Force 1 replacement, the original contract was projected at around $3B. The $170M was for to determine the requirements for the new aircraft. In the trade, the $170M would be called NRE (Non-recurring engineering costs), which will be a big part of the total contract.


#18

This is all speculation. No one knows what’s inside Air Force One, no one knows if it’s been upgraded, ever, and no one one knows why a new version would be built. It’s like telling our enemies: “Here’s a top secret problem we’re having, so whatever you know is still valid.”

That’s just dumb, and pointless and a security risk.

reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-airplane-idUSKBN13V1S5

This looks like a deceive-leak story.

Ed


#19

President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday said he would personally “negotiate the prices” with Boeing Co. of the planes to be used as Air Force One, promising to block a future order if necessary and to continue using the existing aircraft for the presidential plane.

**Mr. Trump, in a Wednesday morning interview on NBC, said he had spoken to Boeing Chief Executive Dennis Muilenburg on Tuesday **following criticism Mr. Trump leveled at the company about what he perceived were elevated prices for the planes. Mr. Trump accused the company of attempting to charge more than $4 billion to build the new planes, a figure that the White House and Air Force have dispute.

Mr. Trump, in the NBC interview, said he saw this as part of his job.

“That’s what I’m here for,” he said. “I’m going to negotiate the prices.”

wsj.com/articles/trump-says-he-will-personally-negotiate-air-force-one-price-with-boeing-1481120870


#20

It turns out Trump’s number was pretty accurate. Final costs will be about $4B. A standard, airline-ready 747 costs around $400M, so there’s no way the $170M number is anywhere near accurate. That’s just for initial costs involved.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.