P-8 POSEIDON COST CUTTING

[CONSO]

A military aircraft whose cost goes down? Boeing churns out P-8 sub hunters based on 737



A military aircraft whose cost goes down? Boeing churns out P-8 sub hunters based on 737 | The Seattle Times

The program is going so smoothly that Boeing has been able to drop the base price of the aircraft by about 30 percent from about $170 million to $115 million.

Goes on..


So an obvious question is how did they do that compared to the KC46A ? ( lets not talk the diffs in mission and use and capability - both are military from modified Commercial . 737 commercial do not have missile and bombbays for example. )



A bit of insight- The P-8 program was designed/bid/priced/ almost entirely by Commercial management and old hands re 737 program. They knew how to read specs and the diff betrween mil spec wiring and commercial wiring standards.



The 767-KC46 was done almosat entirely by newbies ( the pointy end wIth widows is the front- really ! ) with a large dose of 787 mis-management and a plethora of MDC ex- spurts.


The rest is history . .

[Tom Bangla]

Widows in the front take equal opportunities to a new level.

[Wander00]

Wimmin and children first..........

[Lima Juliet]

When they arrive at Lossie they can have Scottish Widows fitted...

[1771 DELETE]

The P8 does have a bomb bay and missiles.

[Sandy Parts]

1771 - I think that was what CONSO was saying. The base 737 model does not have bomb bay etc - P8 does and yet it is apparently coming in cheaper than estimated.
Tick VG to Boeing on this one.

[Wander00]

Could sub lease them to Ryanair if things got tight..........

[KenV]

The 767-KC46 was done almosat entirely by newbies ( the pointy end wIth widows is the front- really ! ) with a large dose of 787 mis-management and a plethora of MDC ex- spurts.

For whatever it's worth, there were lots of "MDC ex-spurts" early in the P-8 program. Indeed, early on, the MMA program (Multimission Maritime Aircraft), the precursor to the P-8 program, was run out of the Douglas facility in Long Beach. It was not until Boeing had won the proposal against Lockheed that the program moved north, taking with it more than a few Douglas folks. And some of those folks were the folks that developed the moving aircraft assembly line on the 717 program in Long Beach and applied it to the 737 production line in Renton, where it's still in use (albeit in a much further refined state.) And it was the MD-95 program (which was renamed 717 post merger) that first developed the current standard business model of giving suppliers more design authority and with it risk sharing.

And about that tanker program: the early tanker program was run out of Long Beach as well, using engineers that developed the KC-10 and its Advanced Refueling Boom, along with the RARO (Remote Aerial Refueling Operator) station developed for the Dutch KDC-10. But they got pushed aside by the KC-767 folks in Seattle who basically came up with a wide body KC-135, right down to the old limited envelope KC-135 refueling boom. It was not until AFTER winning the protest that Boeing put the KC-10s FBW advanced refueling boom and an advanced RARO station on the KC-46.

My guess is that Boeing will be able to drive cost out of the KC-46 during full rate production the way they drove cost out of the P-8. Indeed they'll have to if they hope to ever recoup the billions in company money they have sunk into the KC-46 program.

[pasta]

Could sub lease them to Ryanair if things got tight..........

Just wait for the inflight request: please pay us another 50 quid, or we'll open the bomb doors and drop your luggage in the sea.

No cash? No problem, for an additional £5 fee we also take cards...

[AndoniP]

haha, might be a decent way of getting rid of unruly passengers, james bond style

[CONSO]

re

the early tanker program

I assume you are NOT talking the 2001 ( lease) program ? This was the one put forward as a lease as the result of 911. One of the biggest problems was the interference of the MDC Military types who came up with the idea to assemble a 767 on the everett line- fly it to wichita- take it apart, install all the geer whiz systems, put it back together, etc.

The Commercial people were to deliver a flyable ' green ' airplane to the Military types at Boeing/everett field which then ' belonged' to the Boeing Military Systems- to be flown to either Long Beach or most likely wichita for ' reassembly '. This was to avoid ITAR issues and simply keep the 767 line open. Thus the costs were outrageous squared.

Add to that the Sears Dryun(she of the C-17 program ) mess along with tassle toed R DeLeon games- and the result is history.

[GlobalNav]

Program Differences- P-8 vs KC-46

If I am not mistaken,the P-8 is being procured strictly as a military aircraft, certified to military specifications and airworthiness requirements- derived from a civil airplane design, but neither seeking civil airworthiness certification nor achieving it.

On the other hand, the KC-46 starts as a new FAA-approved 767-2c, modified by STC with installation of numerous military subsystems and finally provisioned with certain military systems and functions that meet only military airworthiness requirements.

If that sounds "simple", it's not and it has been made all the more complex by an unending series of revisions of what belongs in each "bin" and a complex sequence of assembly of the pieces. All with their share of controversy and misunderstandings.

Program management at its finest.

[tdracer]

On the other hand, the KC-46 starts as a new FAA-approved 767-2c, modified by STC with installation of numerous military subsystems and finally provisioned with certain military systems and functions that meet only military airworthiness requirements.

True, but the 767-2C is built with "provisions" to ease the transition to the KC-46 without having to take everything apart - for that reason the 767 line is now ITAR (even though they're still building 767-300F on it). They don't add most of the military stuff during the assembly - they fly the "737" to Boeing field, push it across the street to the Thompson building, then turn it into a P-8. Similarly, they build a 767-2C, push it to the other end of Paine Field to the Everett Mod Center, and turn it into a KC-46.
In concept, the 767-2C/KC-46 is very similar to the P-8. In practice the KC-46 still has a ways to go...

[KenV]

I assume you are NOT talking the 2001 ( lease) program ?

Correct, I am not. That was an "off the shelf commercial" KC-767.

[Sandy Parts]

maybe Boeing saved some money by sending some of the early P8 engineers to look around an MR2 on a visit to Pax River many moons ago. The crew were proud to show them around given how the UK would soon be equipped with the superior 4-engined MRA4....doh! The Boeing boffins seemed especially impressed with the sonobuoy launchers and how they used that little known power source of gravity to get the buoys gone!