Notes between bites of an $8 sandwich and a $2.40 20oz bottle of Diet Coke:
The convention winds down today. The highlight is the 2pm speech by General Michael Moseley. I go straight to the airport after his speech, so I can get to Los Angeles in time to attend the Society of Experimental Test Pilots's (aka, "The Neil Armstrong Show") annual convention tomorrow.
My final round of awards for AFA:
The award for best mini-controversy of the show goes to: "C-5-cost-gate"
Background: Secretary Michael Wynne and Moseley both took Lockheed Martin to task for submitting an offer to complete an upgrade for the C-5 fleet that air force experts say is way too low.
Lockheed says it can finish the job of reengining and improving the reliability of the C-5 fleet for $11.7 billion, but Wynne and Moseley disagree. They said their experts tell them the actual cost is somewhere between 50% and 100% higher than Lockheed's estimate.
Those with long memories may recall Lockheed's original cost estimate for the C-5A program in 1964 was $1.9 billion, but eventually ballooned to $5.8 billion by the time the program was cut short in the early 1970s. Hmmm ...
The award for "most creative question by a reporter" goes to Defense Daily's Michael Sirak
In a press conference with the incoming commander of Air Mobility Command, Mike brilliantly linked a microenomics lesson on the Irish potato famine to the rising costs of the C-5 RERP program.
Here's the logic: Because potatos were a staple fund, Mike explained, the rise in prices during the famine didn't cause demand to drop. The Irish simply bought less of other things and still purchased about the same amount of potatos.
How does that relate to the C-5 program, you may ask? I could try to tell you that, but I'm still trying to figure it out, too. I think it means that the C-5 is a staple, so the air force is stuck with it no matter how much the price continues to rise.
Who says reporters don't know math?
on September 26, 2007 10:34 PM | Reply
Reporters may know maths but they don't seem to know much spelling (you win the Dan Qayle Memorial Award).
I'm sure Mike has a valid point about airlift but his famine facts are a little off the glideslope...the fundamental point being that there were no potatoes to buy because the potato blight killed them all, and even if the starving peasants (who grew not bought all their food) actually had any money there was no alternative food source available.
There's some tortuous C-17 analogy struggling to get out of that one.
on September 26, 2007 11:12 PM | Reply
What a damn cool "job" you have :) Want to trade? What I wouldn't give to do what it is you do...
Oh, the stories you hear....oh the some I ma sure you would want to forget...
on September 27, 2007 2:47 PM | Reply
Any comments on what Gen. Moseley said about the JTA being used as a mini gunship?
on September 28, 2007 5:10 AM | Reply
Yo HerkEng,
On the JCA as mini-gunship, the idea has been around for a couple years. I first heard Alenia talking about it as a potential mission at least that long ago. The idea is to strap a 30mm on specially modified C-27J. AvWeek reported a couple weeks ago that Alenia is looking at a stretch version of the C-27J, but that may be just for cargo as opposed to special mission roles. Look for Boeing to take the lead role on the modification program. The idea has to be appealing. It reminds me of the old AC-47s.
And, to Airpower, I am so ashamed. I blame the extreme sleep deprivation this week!
on September 30, 2007 11:40 PM | Reply
Man, you shoulda been at NBAA...the Coke Zeros were $2 (and the machine took cards), lunch was free (and fabulous) plus Bombardier was handing out silver iPod Shuffles.
God bless you Canada.
But Atlanta, your airport sucks. I mean you TSA.
AP
PS - The 'AC-27 gunship' nonsense is just another example, if any was needed, of how the Air Force has turned the entire JCA plan into a perverted farce.