C-17 restart

[West Coast]

More teasing of a C-17 restart.

https://www.twz.com/air/boeing-encou...jthDkBBT05xjdA

[Hangarless]

Originally Posted by West Coast

More teasing of a C-17 restart.

https://www.twz.com/air/boeing-encou...jthDkBBT05xjdA

Sometimes it becomes very difficult or cost ineffective to improve on such a proven design.

"if it ain't broke, dont' fix it"

[ORAC]

Been through this before. All the jigs and productions facilities for the C-17 are gone, even the entire production site is gone. Many of the parts - such as even the engines - are out of production and no longer available.

With the redesign needed to introduce modern materials, and meet new requirements, restarting production could take longer and be more expensive than a new programme - though I am sure Boeing would love it.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by ORAC

Been through this before. All the jigs and productions facilities for the C-17 are gone, even the entire production site is gone. Many of the parts - such as even the engines - are out of production and no longer available.

With the redesign needed to introduce modern materials, and meet new requirements, restarting production could take longer and be more expensive than a new programme - though I am sure Boeing would love it.

Yes Orac. No the production site is not gone, drive by it twice a week to/from work. The building is still there, leased out to others. There are other locations that can host building and have the skilled labor available. The same challenges to build a NG C17 were likely present to build the classic model, and imagine the naysayers were present then as well.

Just watch and wait like the rest of us.

[GeeRam]

Originally Posted by ORAC

Been through this before. All the jigs and productions facilities for the C-17 are gone, even the entire production site is gone. Many of the parts - such as even the engines - are out of production and no longer available.

With the redesign needed to introduce modern materials, and meet new requirements, restarting production could take longer and be more expensive than a new programme - though I am sure Boeing would love it.

Surely the whole point (and benefit) would be not to do any re-design or introduce new materials...?
Its quite a sensible thing to consider, it would still be a huge time saving, even with creating a new production facility, new tooling, and putting new engines and kit back into production....compared to a new clean sheet design that would add a decade plus to getting to first flight off the line.

[Herod]

Please, can we Brits have some? Pretty please.

[higthepig]

Originally Posted by Herod

Please, can we Brits have some? Pretty please.

We can't afford any.......

[EXDAC]

How many times did MD say if you want to keep C-17 production open you need to buy more NOW? I saw the MD-11 tooling/fixtures piled up to be cut up for scrap. Don't know what happened to C-17 tooling as that was on a different site across the airport.

[ORAC]

Pratt & Whitney ceased production of the F117-PW-100 engine, which powers the C-17 when the manufacturing line in Middletown, Connecticut, shut down after delivering the final unit in January 2016.

The current support programme for the engines runs till 2027, this will be renewed but, inevitably, costs will increase year by year and the number of spare engines will shrink.

Which is why, quoting from the article above, the C-17 proposed isn't the same as the current models, any more than the 747-8 is the same as the original 747.

Quote:

It is unclear what it might cost to get the C-17 line restarted and what the unit price of these new-production aircraft would be in the end.

There are various factors at play, including whether Boeing retains any relevant tooling, the knowledge base of its current workforce, the state of third-party supply chains, and the availability of physical space to build the airplanes.

Back in 2019, the company sold off the facilities in Long Beach, California, where it built the original run of Globemaster IIIs.

More than a decade ago, the RAND Corporation did conduct a detailed, independent analysis that explored options for resuming production of the baseline C-17A, a new C-17B, and a significantly revised “fuel efficient” C-17FE derivative.

The C-17B was “a variant Boeing has proposed that adds centerline landing gear, a tire deflation/inflation system, higher-thrust engines, advanced flaps, and an advanced situational awareness and countermeasures system,” according to RAND’s report.

The C-17FE derivative “would have a narrower fuselage, up-rated engines, a double-element flap system, winglets, a longer loading ramp, a shorter cargo door, and a modified horizontal tail.”

​​​​​​​Sort of like Trigger's broom......