PDA

View Full Version : Trump says cancel new Air Force One: Costs 'out of control'



Cigar
12-06-2016, 11:31 AM
The government should cancel its multibillion-dollar order for new Air Force One presidential planes, Donald Trump declared Tuesday, serving notice he's ready to jump in and start making decisions six weeks before his inauguration.

Costs for the two Boeing 747s are "totally out of control," Trump told reporters in the lobby of his New York skyscraper.

The government has contracted with Boeing to build two or more new planes, which would go into service around 2024. That means Trump wouldn't fly on the new planes, which carry U.S. presidents around the globe, unless he pursued and won a second term. But the Air Force has pressed for a faster schedule, saying the current planes are becoming too expensive to repair and keep in good flying shape.

The contract for the planes was to be about $3 billion, but costs have been reported to be rising. Trump tweeted early Tuesday, "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!"

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/95684ac1d4a84415ad8b0dd89d01587c/trump-heads-back-out-road-thank-you-tour

Newpublius
12-06-2016, 11:39 AM
The government should cancel its multibillion-dollar order for new Air Force One presidential planes, Donald Trump declared Tuesday, serving notice he's ready to jump in and start making decisions six weeks before his inauguration.

Costs for the two Boeing 747s are "totally out of control," Trump told reporters in the lobby of his New York skyscraper.

The government has contracted with Boeing to build two or more new planes, which would go into service around 2024. That means Trump wouldn't fly on the new planes, which carry U.S. presidents around the globe, unless he pursued and won a second term. But the Air Force has pressed for a faster schedule, saying the current planes are becoming too expensive to repair and keep in good flying shape.

The contract for the planes was to be about $3 billion, but costs have been reported to be rising. Trump tweeted early Tuesday, "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!"

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/95684ac1d4a84415ad8b0dd89d01587c/trump-heads-back-out-road-thank-you-tour

This is where government justification for spending your money strains credulity. Its not their money, they just don't care, they never will.

MMC
12-06-2016, 11:40 AM
And? Whats your problem with it?



According to President-elect Donald Trump, Boeing is "doing a number" on the American people by raising the cost of construction on the new Air Force One aircraft to over $4 billion.


Before entering his office on Tuesday morning, he took a question from the press about canceling the order.


"The plane is totally out of control. It's going to be over 4 billion dollars for the Air Force One program. I think it's ridiculous. I think Boeing is doing a little bit of a number. We want Boeing to make a lot of money, but not that much money," he said.....snip~


http://townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/12/06/cancel-it-trump-says-boeings-air-force-one-contract-is-out-of-control-n2255870



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0ffUU2j7Vo

Cigar
12-06-2016, 11:43 AM
At this point, I could care less what the next President(s) fly in ...

The Current 747
The New an Improved 747
Or Trumps Own 747 - Preferred :wink:

MMC
12-06-2016, 11:49 AM
At this point, I could care less what the next President(s) fly in ...

The Current 747
The New an Improved 747
Or Trumps Own 747 - Preferred :wink:

Then why did you post it up, if you didn't care? Someone mentioned your name and intelligence in the same sentence. Lets see if you can live up to that thought.

Or didn't you agree with him that AF One costs tons of fuel and pollutes the environment.


During the campaign Donald Trump attacked Airforce One as an outdated "very old" plane that costs tons of fuel and pollutes the environment -.....snip~

gamewell45
12-06-2016, 11:56 AM
This is where government justification for spending your money strains credulity. Its not their money, they just don't care, they never will.
Let Trump take his chances on continuing to use the older Air Force one plane; he's been made aware of the issues at hand. Hopefully the wings don't come off in flight; that would certainly ruin his day

exploited
12-06-2016, 11:57 AM
The Trumpkins will eat this up, and then Trump will go on a real spending spree elsewhere. What can you do?

MMC
12-06-2016, 12:19 PM
Let Trump take his chances on continuing to use the older Air Force one plane; he's been made aware of the issues at hand. Hopefully the wings don't come off in flight; that would certainly ruin his day

He might just use a smaller plane and not carry around a bunch of the MS media.....and that would be a major improvement. Then again he might use his own and not foot the bill to the people, huh?

MMC
12-06-2016, 12:21 PM
The Trumpkins will eat this up, and then Trump will go on a real spending spree elsewhere. What can you do?

Then illiberals will always have something to whine about. So there is some good that comes from it.

del
12-06-2016, 12:23 PM
He might just use a smaller plane and not carry around a bunch of the MS media.....and that would be a major improvement. Then again he might use his own and not foot the bill to the people, huh?
and monkeys might be flying out of your ass right this minute

you better check

MMC
12-06-2016, 12:25 PM
and monkeys might be flying out of your ass right this minute

you better check

Can they get by your tongue.....You better wipe, when your done.

exploited
12-06-2016, 12:52 PM
Then illiberals will always have something to whine about. So there is some good that comes from it.

This is funny because there is no other group of people more whiny and self entitled than modern day Republicans. They are a truly pathetic bunch, for the most part.

Cigar
12-06-2016, 12:53 PM
Then why did you post it up, if you didn't care? Someone mentioned your name and intelligence in the same sentence. Lets see if you can live up to that thought.

Or didn't you agree with him that AF One costs tons of fuel and pollutes the environment.


During the campaign Donald Trump attacked Airforce One as an outdated "very old" plane that costs tons of fuel and pollutes the environment -.....snip~

To see if I can get an idiot to complain ... know any?

Cigar
12-06-2016, 12:57 PM
Did Boeing Get Out Of Line?



So, Boeing is critical of the Orange One, so the Orange One Tweets 'Cancel the Order for AF1'

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/did-boeing-get-out-of-line

This morning Donald Trump lashed out at Boeing claiming its budget for the successor to the current Air Force One is wildly overpriced.

What prompted this?

It certainly seems that the number is off. But why did this have Trump's attention this morning? This seems like a relatively obscure issue given the range of things Trump is now working on. TPM Reader TC notes that The Chicago Tribune published this article about 20 minutes (at least according to the 7:30 AM central time timestamp; Trump tweeted at 8:52 AM eastern) before Trump tweeted.

The Tribune articles by Robert Reed starts like this ...

The brain trust at Boeing, among the city's largest companies and a global aerospace and defense powerhouse, must cringe every time President-elect Donald Trump riffs on foreign policy, especially when it comes to dealing with China.

Boeing has a high percentage of its manufacturing in the US. But it is highly dependent on exports, especially to China.

MMC
12-06-2016, 12:57 PM
This is funny because there is no other group of people more whiny and self entitled than modern day Republicans. They are a truly pathetic bunch, for the most part.

Not as pathetic as illiberals with no heart, morals, or common sense. The Weaker of the Two.

MMC
12-06-2016, 01:07 PM
To see if I can get an idiot to complain ... know any?

That's not what you said here. A few moments ago. Having trouble remembering are ya? :grin:


http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by MMC http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1833701#post1833701) So then why did post a thread up about it, again? If you don't care then it wouldn't have interested you to put up your own thread on it.

Someone mentioned you and intelligence in the same sentence.....so when are you going to start showing what they said was possible?




http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Cigar http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1833703#post1833703) Because I like posting Trump Lies ...



Yeah I do.....Seems there is one that forgets what it says only a few moments ago. So how can you upgrade to using that intelligence so as not to be put on display with your complaining. :laugh:

exploited
12-06-2016, 01:08 PM
Not as pathetic as illiberals with no heart, morals, or common sense. The Weaker of the Two.

Wrong. There is no group more pathetic than low-information Republican voters, and particularly the Boomers.

Cigar
12-06-2016, 01:10 PM
I have to be careful I don't make any quick turns, or I'll snap one of these guys neck :laugh:

MMC
12-06-2016, 01:11 PM
Wrong. There is no group more pathetic than low-information Republican voters, and particularly the Boomers.

No I was correct.....as the illiberals always show themselves as low information voters, the victims they were created as. A Reality they can never change.

MMC
12-06-2016, 01:13 PM
I have to be careful I don't make any quick turns, or I'll snap one of these guys neck :laugh:

No.....you just have to be careful to not be caught lying like Hillary. Oh and that's not possible....as you have difficulty making your way out of wet paper bag. http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/smiley_ROFLMAO.gif

Beevee
12-06-2016, 01:15 PM
When Trump uses one of his companies to acquire Boeing, the cost will be acceptable, probably up to 8 billion dollars.

MMC
12-06-2016, 01:18 PM
When Trump uses one of his companies to acquire Boeing, the cost will be acceptable, probably up to 8 billion dollars.


New technology eh, for when they stop the pollution and the use of tons of fuel, huh? :laugh:

Don
12-06-2016, 01:30 PM
I think Trump is right to question the price of the plane(s) Boeing will be building. We've all been talking for years (right and left) about businesses ripping off the government and we all suspect (know) its a deal for the businesses and politicians and military people who get the money or favors and we get to pay $400 for a hammer.

The 747's Boeing will build to replace the two currently in service. They are far more than just airplanes. They are military planes that can refuel in midair. They have defenses for missile attacks and who knows, they may also carry offensive capability. Its a flying command center in the event of war. They are also plush. The two planes are more expensive too because of the double and triple checks to make it as safe as an airplane can be. I'm sure the package includes extra engines and probably other gear which adds to their costs. A standard 747 costs $357 million dollars ready to fly so even with all the extras $4 billion does sound a bit high. Drain that swamp President Trump! Honest competition won't hurt these companies, it will help them.

Cletus
12-06-2016, 03:12 PM
They should just outfit two C17s and assign them to the President.

Cigar
12-06-2016, 03:14 PM
They should just outfit two C17s and assign them to the President.

Fine with me ... but will Trump Ride in one? :laugh:

Cigar
12-06-2016, 03:17 PM
I think Trump is right to question the price of the plane(s) Boeing will be building. We've all been talking for years (right and left) about businesses ripping off the government and we all suspect (know) its a deal for the businesses and politicians and military people who get the money or favors and we get to pay $400 for a hammer.

The 747's Boeing will build to replace the two currently in service. They are far more than just airplanes. They are military planes that can refuel in midair. They have defenses for missile attacks and who knows, they may also carry offensive capability. Its a flying command center in the event of war. They are also plush. The two planes are more expensive too because of the double and triple checks to make it as safe as an airplane can be. I'm sure the package includes extra engines and probably other gear which adds to their costs. A standard 747 costs $357 million dollars ready to fly so even with all the extras $4 billion does sound a bit high. Drain that swamp President Trump! Honest competition won't hurt these companies, it will help them.

I say put the Pres in a Figher Jet, make the staff fly commercial and use Uber for the official Presidential Motorcade ... it truly fits a Trump Administration.

Cletus
12-06-2016, 03:18 PM
Fine with me ... but will Trump Ride in one? :laugh:

Why wouldn't he?

Beevee
12-06-2016, 03:21 PM
So, who gave Boeing the 4 billion dollar contract? Or are deals of this nature secret?
If they are not, where are the public details and cost analysis?
Perhaps there is no contract. In which event the 4b dollar cost is the figment of imagination and the creation of an illusion when the price turns out to be 1.5b dollars.
David Copperfield! Take a back seat!

Tahuyaman
12-06-2016, 03:28 PM
The next four years will be very entertaining.

Valishin
12-06-2016, 04:58 PM
This is what truly scares the crap out of the establishment when it comes to Trump. It isn't what he might do in regards to minorities, they know that other than illegals no one else has any real worries there because the President only has so much authority. Those not in the establishment especially those on the left do fear those things mind you and the media has ginned up that fear so much that it is understandable. However for the establishment, they have been scared for years that politicians would run on that smaller government message that is effective for getting elected then commit the true horror of actually trying to govern that way. This is why they don't like Trump because he doesn't play within the norms that have built the culture in Washington. They don't know what to expect and if he actually were to go this direction and the world not fall apart then that puts a huge crack in the armor that has been built by both parties to establishment government as the solver of problems. Of course the flip side could be true as well, if Trump goes this direction and world goes to Hell in a hand basket then that would do a great deal to discredit the small government agenda.

Subdermal
12-06-2016, 05:08 PM
Government inability to manage costs - simultaneous to grabbing an increasingly large percentage of GDP (what's it up to now? 40%?) - is positively decimating economic vitality, and wholly compartmentalizing prosperity in the hands of the Cronyist.

In Wisconsin, we have a public rest stop that has been coined the Taj Mahal d'Toilet - Poynette; Columbia County. 10 years to build. 25 million dollars.

Square brick building with toilets.

A close friend of mine - commercial contractor in that same space - said that the building should have taken no more than a year to build, and should have cost no more than 3 million dollars.

Government.

Sucks.

Common Sense
12-06-2016, 05:35 PM
It's hard to buy from a guy who has had many projects that have gone way over budget...even while not paying what was owed to contractors.

gamewell45
12-06-2016, 05:36 PM
He might just use a smaller plane and not carry around a bunch of the MS media.....and that would be a major improvement. Then again he might use his own and not foot the bill to the people, huh?

Honestly I think his ego would prevent him from not having some MSM surrounding him when he's traveling; besides not that many are MSM as you might think; most are support staff; maybe he can just have a 12 person lear jet manufactured, now that would really save him and the taxpayers money. That would be pretty cheap; he can put the remainder of his staff on a hired rickshaw and meet them at the airport. What say you? :)

Common Sense
12-06-2016, 05:41 PM
Airforce One is a little more than just a regular plane. The media are typically just a few of the people that make up the passengers. There are about 25 crew. It has a host of defensive measures. It can't withstand nuclear ground blast and it probably has more capabilities than are known publicly.

Valishin
12-06-2016, 05:47 PM
Maybe he could put all the staff that he doesn't need during the flight on a jet that doesn't require hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment land scale back to just what is actually needed. Then the staff can get there in advance and be ready for him when he steps off the plane. Not counting secret service and pilots he probably needs at most half a dozen people on the plane while it is in the air. Personal assistant, Chief of Staff, and Press Secretary would be the top three. The rest can get their marching orders on the ground.

The reality is that AF1 has become part of the prestige of being around the president which is not reason enough to continue the practice.

donttread
12-07-2016, 06:52 AM
The government should cancel its multibillion-dollar order for new Air Force One presidential planes, Donald Trump declared Tuesday, serving notice he's ready to jump in and start making decisions six weeks before his inauguration.

Costs for the two Boeing 747s are "totally out of control," Trump told reporters in the lobby of his New York skyscraper.

The government has contracted with Boeing to build two or more new planes, which would go into service around 2024. That means Trump wouldn't fly on the new planes, which carry U.S. presidents around the globe, unless he pursued and won a second term. But the Air Force has pressed for a faster schedule, saying the current planes are becoming too expensive to repair and keep in good flying shape.

The contract for the planes was to be about $3 billion, but costs have been reported to be rising. Trump tweeted early Tuesday, "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!"

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/95684ac1d4a84415ad8b0dd89d01587c/trump-heads-back-out-road-thank-you-tour

Good, the plane needs to be as secure as possible, not the lap of luxary.

Dangermouse
12-07-2016, 08:32 AM
He lied about it to hit out at the Boeing CEO who disapproved his foreign policy, and wiped a billion dollars off their shares. Petty spite is no way to run a country. It sends a chilling message to potential future critics

Newpublius
12-07-2016, 09:10 AM
WTO found US government contracts indirectly subsidize Boeing.

Newpublius
12-07-2016, 09:13 AM
Airforce One is a little more than just a regular plane. The media are typically just a few of the people that make up the passengers. There are about 25 crew. It has a host of defensive measures. It can't withstand nuclear ground blast and it probably has more capabilities than are known publicly.

Find it odd that you'd note it 'cant' withstand a nuclear blast. Most people would assume a nuclear blast WOULD take down a Boeing.

In any event, I'll take that as a typo? That you meant it CAN?

If so, that's insane.

MMC
12-07-2016, 09:31 AM
Honestly I think his ego would prevent him from not having some MSM surrounding him when he's traveling; besides not that many are MSM as you might think; most are support staff; maybe he can just have a 12 person lear jet manufactured, now that would really save him and the taxpayers money. That would be pretty cheap; he can put the remainder of his staff on a hired rickshaw and meet them at the airport. What say you? :)

Again he doesn't have to have all kinds from the MS Media. Technically he could go with the AP and Reuters who all others get their Tipsheets from. He doesn't even have to carry ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox. Nor the NY Times, WAPO, and the WSJ.

The Budget for it is 4 Billion. I see nothing wrong with holding a contractor to accountability and cost. Also, the plane doesn't need to be High class.....just functional.

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.Mb91eb4b07ce5a35d62fa192df64ab0ffo0&w=300&h=225&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M0ac4222f104412157ed621982462b39bo0&w=300&h=168&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M4b7619107bd0337f75d250f5bc0d6f3eo0&w=300&h=199&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.Mfbec4282ff8010f418b3069cecc61ebbo0&w=300&h=168&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M895241de4c9b5ac9e660c0131eb8db49o0&w=300&h=199&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M519d824fe239c96c632838bfe27c1cb9o0&w=300&h=168&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

http://listabuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Air-Force-One1.jpg

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 11:00 AM
Yes, Air Forace One is highly sophisticated and loaded with technologies and systems uncommon to any other aircraft, but that doesn't mean the builder of the aircraft is above being scrutinized.

Crepitus
12-07-2016, 11:14 AM
I can't believe you guys are trying to excuse this.

First let's keep in mind that this tweet came out exactly 22 minutes after the CEO of Boeing publicly criticised Trump.

Now let's look at it a little closer. It's not 4 billion per plane, it's actually a little more than 1 billion per.

Keep in mind that this isn't your grandma's passenger plane, it's is a nuclear hardened military command and control bunker in a civillians aircraft skin.

Special shielding, sophisticated communications gear, anti missile capability, extended range, mid air refueling capability, I'm sure the list goes on and on. When you look at you will find it has a similar price tag to a bomber with similar capabilities.

Stop making excuses for the moron you elected and start holding his feet to the fire or we are all doomed.

MMC
12-07-2016, 11:44 AM
Yes, Air Forace One is highly sophisticated and loaded with technologies and systems uncommon to any other aircraft, but that doesn't mean the builder of the aircraft is above being scrutinized.

That's correct.....and the one thing they can get rid of.....is the gym. Although, our ignorant Illiberals probably think that it includes a basketball court.

Newpublius
12-07-2016, 12:28 PM
I can't believe you guys are trying to excuse this.

First let's keep in mind that this tweet came out exactly 22 minutes after the CEO of Boeing publicly criticised Trump.

Now let's look at it a little closer. It's not 4 billion per plane, it's actually a little more than 1 billion per.

Keep in mind that this isn't your grandma's passenger plane, it's is a nuclear hardened military command and control bunker in a civillians aircraft skin.

Special shielding, sophisticated communications gear, anti missile capability, extended range, mid air refueling capability, I'm sure the list goes on and on. When you look at you will find it has a similar price tag to a bomber with similar capabilities.

Stop making excuses for the moron you elected and start holding his feet to the fire or we are all doomed.

You had me at nuclear hardened.

Look, if we have nuclear war, I definitely want the President to die in that conflict.

Its too much, billion, four billion.....

these people need to SHARPEN THEIR PENCILS.

Newpublius
12-07-2016, 12:34 PM
Yes, Air Forace One is highly sophisticated and loaded with technologies and systems uncommon to any other aircraft, but that doesn't mean the builder of the aircraft is above being scrutinized.

Agreed and from what I'm reading it sounds like the play thing of a Middle Eastern despot who is spending other people's money.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Complex

Less than a billion.

Absolutely ridiculous that these people purport to spend money like this.

Cletus
12-07-2016, 12:37 PM
There is no reason the President could not use a retrofitted C-17. There would in fact be a number of advantages to him doing so.

Cigar
12-07-2016, 12:46 PM
There is no reason the President could not use a retrofitted C-17. There would in fact be a number of advantages to him doing so.

I say we start Friday January 20th 2017 ... using a Cargo Jet to transport The Persistent of The United States to other Countries :grin:

Now that will have the appropriate look for what we have as a Statesman :laugh:

Cigar
12-07-2016, 12:49 PM
Yes, Air Forace One is highly sophisticated and loaded with technologies and systems uncommon to any other aircraft, but that doesn't mean the builder of the aircraft is above being scrutinized.

Sure, we can always go with the alternative, Air-Bus ... oh wait, didn't we do that with The Presidential Limo and people went Ape-Sh!t :laugh:

Cletus
12-07-2016, 12:50 PM
I say we start Friday January 20th 2017 ... using a Cargo Jet to transport The Persistent of The United States to other Countries :grin:

Now that will have the appropriate look for what we have as a Statesman :laugh:

A new paint job and you wouldn't know the difference.

Common
12-07-2016, 12:56 PM
Sure, we can always go with the alternative, Air-Bus ... oh wait, didn't we do that with The Presidential Limo and people went Ape-Sh!t :laugh:

Cigar may I remind you, that your President Mr Donald Trump will do whatever it is he wants with air force 1 or anything else. :)

MMC
12-07-2016, 01:14 PM
A new paint job and you wouldn't know the difference.
He wouldn't know anything about the last 2 VC 25s/747-200s that Boeing built. Nor the Globemeister C-17III.


http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.Mbb53cf52fa770f13a54d4c16bcdbc563o0&w=300&h=187&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0 http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.Ma0e6ce3b74a14efc1ef80e934b42f961H0&w=300&h=187&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M9c39f5903917e6bf58d2bfa354b99953o0&w=300&h=187&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

donttread
12-07-2016, 01:33 PM
He lied about it to hit out at the Boeing CEO who disapproved his foreign policy, and wiped a billion dollars off their shares. Petty spite is no way to run a country. It sends a chilling message to potential future critics


Corruption is no way to run a country either. Pick your posion

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 01:44 PM
Cigar may I remind you, that your President Mr Donald Trump will do whatever it is he wants with air force 1 or anything else. :)


These liberal lemmings are upset about this and the construction of the freaking aircraft hasn't even started yet. These people are just plain old fashioned dolts. They look for every reason to complain even where no complaint is evident.


They claim to respect the concept of fiscal restraint, then when someone actually proposes employing some fiscal restraint, they cry foul. Hypocritical nit-wits.

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 01:49 PM
Boeing is also concerned that their business relationship with Iran is at risk.

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 01:51 PM
Sure, we can always go with the alternative, Air-Bus ... oh wait, didn't we do that with The Presidential Limo and people went Ape-Sh!t :laugh:


So, you think that the manufacturer of a specialized aircraft should have Carte Blanche?

donttread
12-07-2016, 01:58 PM
Find it odd that you'd note it 'cant' withstand a nuclear blast. Most people would assume a nuclear blast WOULD take down a Boeing.

In any event, I'll take that as a typo? That you meant it CAN?

If so, that's insane.


Withstand a nuclear hit in the sky? Survive in pieces all the way to the ground maybe.

donttread
12-07-2016, 01:59 PM
Yes, Air Forace One is highly sophisticated and loaded with technologies and systems uncommon to any other aircraft, but that doesn't mean the builder of the aircraft is above being scrutinized.

Nor does it mean that whaat we have isn't good enough

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 02:03 PM
Nor does it mean that whaat we have isn't good enough

The aircraft is still in the planning phase. Maybe Trump agrees with you on that?

MisterVeritis
12-07-2016, 04:08 PM
I can't believe you guys are trying to excuse this.
. . .Stop making excuses for the moron you elected and start holding his feet to the fire or we are all doomed.
I bet the cost went down.

nathanbforrest45
12-07-2016, 04:17 PM
God forbid the government spend 1 penny less that last year. The economy would be doomed if Washington couldn't continue raising our taxes and increasing spending without ceasing.

Beevee
12-07-2016, 04:18 PM
I bet the cost went down.
...along with the quality.

Don
12-07-2016, 04:28 PM
Let Trump take his chances on continuing to use the older Air Force one plane; he's been made aware of the issues at hand. Hopefully the wings don't come off in flight; that would certainly ruin his day

He already will travel in the present Air Force One's. The new ones aren't scheduled to be delivered until about 2024. Just in time for the next Republican president of the United States.

MMC
12-07-2016, 04:50 PM
I bet the cost went down.


Nope.....and they even admit cost will go up. You didn't think he knew what he was talking about, did you?



Boeing Said to Offer Talks on Air Force One After Trump Tweets .....


Boeing Co. executives told officials on President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team that the cost of a new version of Air Force One could be lowered if the government agrees to reduce its requirements for the plane, people familiar with the discussions said.

The company’s executives reached out to Trump’s staff after the Republican said on Twitter on Tuesday that plans for a new Air Force One should be canceled because of "ridiculous" costs. The missive put in Trump’s sights both a plane that is one of the most visible symbols of the American presidency and a firm that is the nation’s largest exporter.

Pentagon Budget

The Pentagon already is budgeting $3.2 billion for research and development, military construction and acquisition of two of the Air Force One planes through fiscal 2021, said Kevin Brancato, the lead government contracts analyst for Bloomberg Government. More money is anticipated in the two years after that. Boeing 747-8 planes average about $225 million (http://www.boeing.com/company/about-bca/) each, he said, which means most of the expenses will go to outfitting the planes for presidential use.


The Air Force and Boeing are still conducting work to reduce the program’s technical risks before the company is awarded an advanced development contract, Captain Michael Hertzog, a spokesman for the service branch, said in an e-mail. Budgeted spending can be expected “to change as the program matures with the completion of the risk reduction activities,” he said.

The Boeing executives who contacted Trump officials suggested that the price of the new planes could be reduced if the Air Force and Secret Service revise their specifications for the aircraft, the people familiar with the discussions said. The company was not told in advance that Trump would tweet about the plane, the people said.

The Air Force said last year that it was giving Boeing the contract without competition because its plane is the only one manufactured in the U.S. “that when fully missionized meets the necessary critically important capabilities” that a president needs. But the service also said it would encourage other companies to bid for the special equipment needed to convert the aircraft for presidential use.

Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who heads the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he counted himself among those who think there are too many bells and whistles on Air Force One. “I think it ought to be reviewed,” he told reporters at the Capitol. “I think it’s a legitimate concern.”

Tuesday’s tweet wasn’t the first time Trump has mentioned Boeing. At a February rally in South Carolina, where the company makes the 787 Dreamliner, he said Boeing “is building massive plants in China.”

To bolster its standing in the Asian nation, Boeing recently announced plans to open a plant there to install seats on single-aisle 737 jetliners being delivered to Chinese airlines......snip~


http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...weets-iwe6mz3j (http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-07/boeing-said-to-offer-talks-on-air-force-one-after-trump-tweets-iwe6mz3j)

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 05:00 PM
I can't believe you guys are trying to excuse this......

Stop making excuses for the moron you elected and start holding his feet to the fire or we are all doomed.

How is criticizing the cost of an aircraft not yet in the construction phase creating this impending doom? Be specific.

Peter1469
12-07-2016, 05:03 PM
Find it odd that you'd note it 'cant' withstand a nuclear blast. Most people would assume a nuclear blast WOULD take down a Boeing.

In any event, I'll take that as a typo? That you meant it CAN?

If so, that's insane.


It is supposed to survive the radiation- in the event a blast isn't too close to it.

MisterVeritis
12-07-2016, 05:32 PM
I bet the cost went down.

Nope.....and they even admit cost will go up. You didn't think he knew what he was talking about, did you?
You misunderstood my point. After Trump's tweet, I bet the cost went down. I shall try to be more careful.

MisterVeritis
12-07-2016, 05:33 PM
I bet the cost went down.

...along with the quality.
That is unlikely.

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 05:38 PM
It is supposed to survive the radiation- in the event a blast isn't too close to it.


It's also shielded from the effects of EMP.

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 05:43 PM
The partisan Democrats are getting so frantic and petty with their criticisms that two things are going to hapoen. First, people are going to stop listening to them and second, they will cause more people to become Trump supporters.

Crepitus
12-07-2016, 06:02 PM
I bet the cost went down.

Can you show me where it did?

Crepitus
12-07-2016, 06:03 PM
How is criticizing the cost of an aircraft not yet in the construction phase creating this impending doom? Be specific.

Lol. Like I keep telling you guys, read what I posted, not what you wish I had posted.

Crepitus
12-07-2016, 06:05 PM
It is supposed to survive the radiation- in the event a blast isn't too close to it.

And the EMP.

MisterVeritis
12-07-2016, 06:30 PM
Can you show me where it did?
Once it happens. The contract has to be released first, don't you think? The cost volume is a critical component of the proposal.

Peter1469
12-07-2016, 06:39 PM
Once it happens. The contract has to be released first, don't you think? The cost volume is a critical component of the proposal.

It is going to be a cost type contract as opposed to a firm price contract. Because of all the R&D.

MisterVeritis
12-07-2016, 06:42 PM
It is going to be a cost type contract as opposed to a firm price contract. Because of all the R&D.
I have bid many, many cost plus fixed fee and firm fixed price contracts.

Tahuyaman
12-07-2016, 07:41 PM
How is criticizing the cost of an aircraft not yet in the construction phase creating this impending doom? Be specific.


Lol. Like I keep telling you guys, read what I posted, not what you wish I had posted.

I knew that you could not answer the question with any specificity.

Crepitus
12-07-2016, 07:53 PM
I knew that you could not answer the question with any specificity.

Because you aren't asking a question about what I said. You are asking a question about what you wish I has said.

William
12-07-2016, 08:12 PM
Why do you need a ginormous aircraft like a 747 for just one man. What's wrong with buying three business class tickets (one for the President, and two for bodyguards,). He is just a man, and he will be replaced by another man in four or eight years. I don't get why there is all this security surrounding Presidents (and some Prime Ministers,) - like if they have an accident, or are killed, they can easily be replaced. The British Prime Minister travels on charter flights, but they are converting an RAF Airbus A330 tanker at the cost of about 9 million pounds, to act as a permanent Prime Ministerial flight (which will be used as a tanker when not transporting the PM). That's a lot less than the 3 or 4 billion the new Air Force One will cost (which is just crazy, think how many hospital beds or classrooms that will buy). If you must have the prestige - why not something like the Bombardier 8000 at a cost of less than 100 million dollars?

nathanbforrest45
12-08-2016, 09:01 AM
It is going to be a cost type contract as opposed to a firm price contract. Because of all the R&D.


That's just a blank check for Boeing to charge whatever they want and blame it all on the new items required. Why is the government the only entity that is allowed and even expected to pay for for something than originally agreed to?

All of my major clients are coming to me with demands that I lower my pricing to them. If I want to keep the business I will be forced to do that. In order to keep my profit levels sufficient to make handling their account worthwhile I will have to find ways to do things cheaper. Its the way of business versus the way of government way of just throwing whatever money is demanded.

nathanbforrest45
12-08-2016, 09:04 AM
Why do you need a ginormous aircraft like a 747 for just one man. What's wrong with buying three business class tickets (one for the President, and two for bodyguards,). He is just a man, and he will be replaced by another man in four or eight years. I don't get why there is all this security surrounding Presidents (and some Prime Ministers,) - like if they have an accident, or are killed, they can easily be replaced. The British Prime Minister travels on charter flights, but they are converting an RAF Airbus A330 tanker at the cost of about 9 million pounds, to act as a permanent Prime Ministerial flight (which will be used as a tanker when not transporting the PM). That's a lot less than the 3 or 4 billion the new Air Force One will cost (which is just crazy, think how many hospital beds or classrooms that will buy). If you must have the prestige - why not something like the Bombardier 8000 at a cost of less than 100 million dollars?


No one gives a crap if the PM of England is killed in his sleep. The President of the United States is far more important. Hell, why not just fly him around in a Sopwith Camel, that'll do the job won't it?

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 09:58 AM
Because you aren't asking a question about what I said. You are asking a question about what you wish I has said.


You are running from what you said. As usual you can't or won't defend your views.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 10:05 AM
Why do you need a ginormous aircraft like a 747 for just one man.
It's not just for one man. It needs the capabilities to be a mobile national command center. It needs to accommodate a full staff. It even has a modern medical operating room with a medical team to go with it.

Thinking its for only "one man" or could be replaced by a conventional aircraft shows your naïveté.

Valishin
12-08-2016, 10:19 AM
It's not just for one man. It needs the capabilities to be a mobile national command center. It needs to accommodate a full staff. It even has a modern medical operating room with a medical team to go with it.
Thinking its for only "one man" or could be replaced by a conventional aircraft shows your naïveté.
In fairness to other posters, I think part of the concern is the need to even have an aircraft as a mobile command center more or less to be fully staffed. AF1 serves more of status symbol purpose than a tactical one. They could greatly scale back that solution while maintaining a secured communications component and they should.

resister
12-08-2016, 10:34 AM
It's not just for one man. It needs the capabilities to be a mobile national command center. It needs to accommodate a full staff. It even has a modern medical operating room with a medical team to go with it.

Thinking its for only "one man" or could be replaced by a conventional aircraft shows your naïveté.
William is 16, cut em a little slack

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 10:42 AM
Whether people like it or not, it is a requirement and not just a perk of office. In the event of a national / international emergency the president and his cabinet need the capability to do their job from anywhere in the world.

The POTUS is a much more significant world figure than the prime minister of Canada or a head of state from New Zealand or Belgium. The US is still the most powerful nation on earth in several ways.

All that doesn't mean that the manufacturer of this aircraft should have Carte Blanche to run up costs just because they can.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 10:43 AM
William is 16, cut em a little slack

I did......

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 10:45 AM
In fairness to other posters, I think part of the concern is the need to even have an aircraft as a mobile command center more or less to be fully staffed. AF1 serves more of status symbol purpose than a tactical one. They could greatly scale back that solution while maintaining a secured communications component and they should.

No, it's not just a status symbol.

nathanbforrest45
12-08-2016, 11:01 AM
Lol. Like I keep telling you guys, read what I posted, not what you wish I had posted.


I've reread your "we are all doomed" post several times trying to find something different in its meaning, something, oh I don't know, more nuanced maybe. But try as I might I still get that if we don't criticize Trump for wanting to spend less money on AF One then somehow we are all doomed.

I still am not quite sure what we are holding his feet to the fire about. Can you explain without resorting to snark?

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 11:14 AM
I've reread your "we are all doomed" post several times trying to find something different in its meaning, something, oh I don't know, more nuanced maybe. But try as I might I still get that if we don't criticize Trump for wanting to spend less money on AF One then somehow we are all doomed.

I still am not quite sure what we are holding his feet to the fire about. Can you explain without resorting to snark?


He's a partisan hack. He will oppose something he previously supported if it is proposed by a Republican. And no, he has no coherent or thoughtful response.

Cigar
12-08-2016, 11:16 AM
I've reread your "we are all doomed" post several times trying to find something different in its meaning, something, oh I don't know, more nuanced maybe. But try as I might I still get that if we don't criticize Trump for wanting to spend less money on AF One then somehow we are all doomed.

I still am not quite sure what we are holding his feet to the fire about. Can you explain without resorting to snark?

I thought we were all doomed back in 2009 :laugh:

Crepitus
12-08-2016, 11:31 AM
You are running from what you said. As usual you can't or won't defend your views.
Not at all. I'm just refusing to let you out words into my mouth by acting as if I said what I did not.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 11:42 AM
Not at all. I'm just refusing to let you out words into my mouth by acting as if I said what I did not.


You refuse to support your own comments.

Peter1469
12-08-2016, 04:16 PM
Not if the government is properly administering the contract (which is always a likely possibility that they are not in government contracting). It is sort of a blank check. R&D is. Nobody can predict accurate costs ahead of time.

Would you propose a firm fixed price to make a widget that hasn't been invented yet?


That's just a blank check for Boeing to charge whatever they want and blame it all on the new items required. Why is the government the only entity that is allowed and even expected to pay for for something than originally agreed to?

All of my major clients are coming to me with demands that I lower my pricing to them. If I want to keep the business I will be forced to do that. In order to keep my profit levels sufficient to make handling their account worthwhile I will have to find ways to do things cheaper. Its the way of business versus the way of government way of just throwing whatever money is demanded.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 04:27 PM
The systems and technologies used to build a new AF1 have been invented already. Exploding costs is what you get when you eliminate all competition.

MisterVeritis
12-08-2016, 04:31 PM
The systems and technologies used to build a new AF1 have been invented already. Exploding costs is what you get when you eliminate all competition.
You are quite certain. How many years of engineering do you have under your belt?

Despite my security clearances I was not cleared to go aboard Air Force One when it was at Hickam AFB. There is a very large cost involved in keeping things compartmented.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 05:02 PM
You are quite certain. How many years of engineering do you have under your belt?

Despite my security clearances I was not cleared to go aboard Air Force One when it was at Hickam AFB. There is a very large cost involved in keeping things compartmented.


I'll put you down as one who supports the builder of this aircraft having Carte Blanche to charge anything without valid justification.

MisterVeritis
12-08-2016, 05:13 PM
You are quite certain. How many years of engineering do you have under your belt?

Despite my security clearances I was not cleared to go aboard Air Force One when it was at Hickam AFB. There is a very large cost involved in keeping things compartmented.

I'll put you down as one who supports the builder of this aircraft having Carte Blanche to charge anything without valid justification.
Quite the opposite. I do have a decade and a half of engineering time. I received the President's Award for technical innovation. Each one of the technologies my team put together existed. The innovation was in putting things together in novel ways to do things the original designers had not intended nor foreseen. I have a small team of 20 people. My effort was not classified.

My effort was expensive.
Making something a classified program adds greatly to the program costs.

For a program this large the expense is driven by the requirements. Changing the requirements will change the costs.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 05:18 PM
Ohh...... Someone's full of themself today.

MisterVeritis
12-08-2016, 05:20 PM
Ohh...... Someone's full of themself today.
I see you still have difficulty reading posts longer than three lines. You should work on that. Meanwhile, I shall try to keep mine down to a comfortable two lines, just for you.

Tahuyaman
12-08-2016, 05:25 PM
Unlike you, I support maintaining oversight on those who receive the benefit of a winning a government contract no matter who they are or what service they are providing

Peter1469
12-08-2016, 06:13 PM
Unlike you, I support maintaining oversight on those who receive the benefit of a winning a government contract no matter who they are or what service they are providing

The government is supposed to do that. Unfortunately, contract administration gets much less attention than contract procurement.

MMC
12-08-2016, 06:15 PM
Trump’s Air Force One tweet was a brilliant move.....


Yes, that "at the best value" phrase at the end of the statement says it all. Who knows exactly how much the Trump tweet just saved the American taxpayers? But considering that it cost him and us nothing for him to send it, even a few hundred grand looks like a big net windfall.


A lot of people still think that Trump is extremely foolish for tweeting like this as opposed to using the established forms of presidential communication. But the really foolish move would be going on national TV even once to discuss the ongoing Boeing negotiations that at best may save the taxpayers a few hundred million bucks. Twitter is instant. It's easy. And as the Carrier deal proved, it's a great way to either initiate or seal an ongoing negotiation.


And, it's worth noting that, while the dollars saved or number of jobs kept in the country from these two incidents are relatively small, they both involve two key members of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Boeing and Carrier-parent United Technologies (http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/UTX). In pure market cap alone, Trump is really getting a lot of bang for his Twitter buck.


Saving us some money, even if it's just a little bit of money, on the new Air Force One jets is something just about every voter wants. It's a cost-cutting measure on something they know is needed but that they'll never get to enjoy themselves. Like the Carrier deal, this might be a very small win on the economic scale, but it's a lot bigger on the political scale of public opinion.


After Tuesday the only question anyone should have about Trump is not whether he'll stop using Twitter once he's in office, but which company, program, or even person he'll use it to target next. .....snip~

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/06/trumps-air-force-one-tweet-was-a-brilliant-move-commentary.html


Says it all doesn't it.....now here was some intelligence from CNBC. Unlike what the illiberals present us, huh?

MisterVeritis
12-08-2016, 06:16 PM
Unlike you, I support maintaining oversight on those who receive the benefit of a winning a government contract no matter who they are or what service they are providing
You should work on your reading difficulties. Or have your eyes checked.

William
12-09-2016, 04:04 AM
No one gives a crap if the PM of England is killed in his sleep. The President of the United States is far more important. Hell, why not just fly him around in a Sopwith Camel, that'll do the job won't it?

For starters, there's no such animal as the Prime Minister of England, any more than there is the President of California. It is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. And lol, there are not many Sopwith Camels in flying condition. :wink:

And why is the President of the United States more important? He is the chief government officer of just another country - that's all, and he can be replaced, like you do every four or eight years. If he gets assassinated, the VP takes over until you have an election. Why do Americans seem to think that everything American is more important or better than everything else. And even if you believed that, isn't to say it a bit bad-mannered? Like everybody loves where they grew up, but to say "I am the best," is saying "You are not as good as me." And would you say that to a friend? :huh: