|
Post by pepe on Apr 7, 2020 12:03:01 GMT 12
DefenceWorld
U.s.a. Boeing Indefinitely Shuts KC-46, P-8 production Facility Our Bureau 12:21 PM, April 6, 2020 506 Boeing has indefinitely suspended production at its facility in Puget Sound and Moses Lake sites which manufactures KC-46 tankers and P-8 maritime surveillance among other planes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The production facility has been shut since March 23 after some employees were found infected with the Coronavirus. However, a Boeing press release yesterday announced that production would be suspended “till further notice.” “Boeing is extending the temporary suspension of production operations at all Puget Sound area and Moses Lake sites until further notice. These actions are being taken in light of the company's continuing focus on the health and safety of employees, current assessment of the spread of COVID-19 in Washington state, the reliability of the supply chain and additional recommendations from government health authorities,” the company said in a statement on Sunday. Suspension of activities at Boeing facilities was initially announced on March 25. “P-8, KC-46 and other Boeing defense production in the Puget Sound area is mostly low-volume, like around 1-2 per month. So they should be able to recover over the course of the year, assuming the factory deep clean is successful and the pandemic threat turns a corner,” the company spokesperson had said back then. www.defenseworld.net/news/26666/Boeing_Indefinitely_Shuts_KC_46__P_8_production_Facility#.XovCC25uJqx
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 7, 2020 12:12:15 GMT 12
And being FMS, 'you will get the P-8s when you get them'. Forget about 2023.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Apr 7, 2020 12:32:26 GMT 12
And being FMS, 'you will get the P-8s when you get them'. Forget about 2023. Given the apparently parlous state of P3K2 availability I wonder how likely it is that 5 Sqn will be down to just a couple of operational (max) aircraft by 2023... and any delay to the P8A might get us closer to the situation that the UK got into where it actually lost it's fixed wing maritime patrol capability.... so even though the circumstances are different there is a precedent for such to happen. Might be time for Govt to commit to the supposed 'complimentary' maritime patrol capability.... oh I forgot the 'C' word... COVID-19!
|
|
|
Post by pepe on Apr 7, 2020 22:53:52 GMT 12
And being FMS, 'you will get the P-8s when you get them'. Forget about 2023. Given the apparently parlous state of P3K2 availability I wonder how likely it is that 5 Sqn will be down to just a couple of operational (max) aircraft by 2023... and any delay to the P8A might get us closer to the situation that the UK got into where it actually lost it's fixed wing maritime patrol capability.... so even though the circumstances are different there is a precedent for such to happen. Might be time for Govt to commit to the supposed 'complimentary' maritime patrol capability.... oh I forgot the 'C' word... COVID-19! Let's really play Devil's advocate... Perhaps any significant delay, incurred by Boeing, might activate an escape clause for the NZ Government facilitating an ability to dump the deal altogether (and saving them lots of $$$$$). Who just happens to have an (indirect) 50% share of a fleet of underemployed ATR-72 and Q300 aircraft? A few pairs of binoculars and, voila, an instant MPA fleet. It sounds silly but...
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 8, 2020 13:08:29 GMT 12
The only silly part of that 'suggestion' is they might take it up, but the payout for a cancelled contract will still be there so it'll cost at least as much again, and then some. That seems to be how this lot rolls.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 8, 2020 13:17:09 GMT 12
We will need the P-8's more than ever in the future as the world moves into a darker and more dangerous situation post-virus. Tensions are most definitely building politically. Old ATR's will be useless in hunting submarine and fleets when war comes.
|
|
madmark
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 78
|
Post by madmark on Apr 8, 2020 13:25:32 GMT 12
If there is one thing the RNZAF does not need right now, its second hand short range airliners..
|
|
|
Post by pepe on Apr 8, 2020 13:40:33 GMT 12
If there is one thing the RNZAF does not need right now, its second hand short range airliners.. I agree with all the previous comments, but... F27 Friendship, RNZAF, NZ2762 by Mike Cornwall, on Flickr I'm pretty sure they did perform some MPA roles and with politicians being politicians...
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Apr 8, 2020 14:14:12 GMT 12
If there is one thing the RNZAF does not need right now, its second hand short range airliners.. Not even if the P-8 IOC is delayed say three years?
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Apr 8, 2020 14:21:05 GMT 12
Perhaps a "Hands across The Ditch" and borrow one or two of ours?
|
|
madmark
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 78
|
Post by madmark on Apr 8, 2020 18:11:01 GMT 12
Given that the P-8 is a rolling production line, one would imagine that Boeing would just divert one that was previously earmarked for the USN to pick up an RNZAF roundel and the USN would get theirs at a later date. The USN won't miss a 4..
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Apr 8, 2020 18:52:26 GMT 12
What an optimistic view! The US government is daily taking actions that harm their own people, why on earth do you assume they will do any other country any favours?
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 8, 2020 20:18:11 GMT 12
Especially an increasingly socialist(read in the USA as communist)one.
|
|
madmark
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 78
|
Post by madmark on Apr 9, 2020 9:35:06 GMT 12
No optimism, just common sense. Boeing will be keen to maintain its deliveries to international customers. Remember they are still trying to flog more of these things on the international stage. Demonstrating that they can deliver on time and on budget despite what is happening will be part of their sales strategy. The USN is not short of P-8s, if they have to slip the delivery of a few frames by a few months it will not be a major concern for them.
|
|
madmark
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 78
|
Post by madmark on Apr 9, 2020 9:52:47 GMT 12
As an aside, isn't it time this thread was renamed the "RNZAF P-8s" or something similar? We know the future is P-8 shaped, lets embrace it.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 9, 2020 10:02:30 GMT 12
More like it's time this thread died.... ages ago.
|
|
madmark
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 78
|
Post by madmark on Apr 9, 2020 10:04:28 GMT 12
Yeah, maybe this one should be renamed "P-3K2 replacement conspiracy theories" and archived..
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Apr 9, 2020 10:36:22 GMT 12
As an aside, isn't it time this thread was renamed the "RNZAF P-8s" or something similar? We know the future is P-8 shaped, lets embrace it. Normally I'd say that placing the production order is a reasonable point to start a new thread, but as the line has stopped for an undetermined length of time...
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Apr 9, 2020 10:39:55 GMT 12
If there is one thing the RNZAF does not need right now, its second hand short range airliners.. I agree with all the previous comments, but... F27 Friendship, RNZAF, NZ2762 by Mike Cornwall, on Flickr I'm pretty sure they did perform some MPA roles and with politicians being politicians... Think it was mainly SAR using Mk1 eyeballs & binocs wasn't it? Handy little a/c though. I've always wondered about why the underwing tanks were at that funny 'nose down' angle (same as any other F27)... just doesn't seem logical aerodynamically but I guess that's precisely why they are at that angle...weird!
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Apr 9, 2020 10:49:12 GMT 12
No optimism, just common sense. Boeing will be keen to maintain its deliveries to international customers. Remember they are still trying to flog more of these things on the international stage. Demonstrating that they can deliver on time and on budget despite what is happening will be part of their sales strategy. The USN is not short of P-8s, if they have to slip the delivery of a few frames by a few months it will not be a major concern for them. Boeing might want to give the RNZAF (and Korea, and UK, and maybe Aussies) preference, but the USN and US Government have different priorities. It may be fine and the USN would rather delay spending $$. Or they want to retire all their P-3s ASAP and get every P-8 possible as China continues to try it on the the South China Sea while carriers (and other vessels) struggle to deploy. If you think that's a conspiracy theory, I'm not sure what to say.
|
|