Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USAF seeks to bypass aircraft engine manufacturers
Flight Global ^ | 3/7/2012 | Flight Global

Posted on 03/07/2012 7:13:34 PM PST by U-238

The US Air Force is considering buying engine parts for some of its aircraft from third-party manufacturers, the service's top officials told the US Congress on 6 March.

"We have taken a look at competing some aspects of engine components and have seen potential for significant [cost] reductions," said air force secretary Michael Donley, during his testimony before the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. "We forecast a saving of $40 million," he added.

In recent years, several companies have received regulatory approval under the parts manufacturing approval (PMA) category to sell reverse-engineered parts for popular commercial engines, such as the CFM International CFM56.

Air force chief of staff Gen Norton Schwartz, testifying at the same hearing, said the service has had good experiences with buying refurbished commercial parts and parts built by third-party manufacturers for the CFM56-derived General Electric F108 turbofan installed on the Boeing KC-135 tanker fleet. The USAF's efforts have yielded some "very significant savings," he said.

The service is working to secure the data rights to the Pratt & Whitney F117 turbofan installed on the Boeing C-17 strategic transport, in order to pursue the same strategy for that fleet, Schwartz said. The USAF wants to pursue such a strategy for as many systems as possible, particularly for those that are not exclusive to the military, he added.

(Excerpt) Read more at flightglobal.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; nortonschwartz; turbofan; usaf

1 posted on 03/07/2012 7:13:37 PM PST by U-238
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: U-238

When I hear about savings of $40 million by messing with something that WORKS and is pretty important to an aircraft (like an engine), for some reason I envision plane crashes and dead pilots.


2 posted on 03/07/2012 7:24:27 PM PST by Never on my watch (I'd rather light a candle than curse the flatulence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

Yep. They can probably save a ton of money with Chinese knockoff.


3 posted on 03/07/2012 7:26:20 PM PST by battlecry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

I agree. I had the same reaction


4 posted on 03/07/2012 7:26:34 PM PST by U-238
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

I feel the same way. Cut where it doesn’t threaten lives.


5 posted on 03/07/2012 7:27:42 PM PST by catbertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: U-238

Yet, the use of aftermarket parts, even simple SS bolts and nuts, on commercial airliners can result in multimillion fines to the airline rehab industry.

Sure, it makes lots of sense to be able to use aftermarket parts on much more highly sophisticated military jets to save a few quid, as long as the admiral is able to enjoy his $600 toilet seat! Not!


6 posted on 03/07/2012 7:31:23 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

Im in total agreement


7 posted on 03/07/2012 7:32:31 PM PST by U-238
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: U-238
"We forecast a saving of $40 million," he added.

Not even the cost of one airplane that might be lost to say nothing of the crew member(s). Typical bureaucrat non think from people who know NOTHING about reality. Sort of like MacNamara during Vietnam running the war as a spreadsheet exercise.

8 posted on 03/07/2012 7:35:01 PM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch

exactly. planes flown on the edge of stability have to be the best they can be.


9 posted on 03/07/2012 7:39:11 PM PST by RitchieAprile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

We can save a couple hundred million $ by not buying ugly statues for federal buildings and limiting Michelle to 3 lavish vacations per year.


10 posted on 03/07/2012 7:45:22 PM PST by Never on my watch (I'd rather light a candle than curse the flatulence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: U-238

I used to work for an aircraft engine manufacturer. In general, they don’t make their parts, they buy them from the lowest cost supplier that can produce the parts. They don’t come from the Magic Land of Perfect Quality as a rule, often they come from small businesses that have been making the same stuff the same way for years (because FAA regulations discourage change). The OEM’s will mark parts up as high as the market will bear as long as they have the monopoly - there’s no reason why aftermarket suppliers cannot make the same parts cheaper and better, and make money while saving customers money.


11 posted on 03/07/2012 8:17:56 PM PST by Some Fat Guy in L.A. (Hope springs eternal - maybe the Bucs will break .500 this year)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: U-238

In the area of Defense Weaponry, $40 Mil is chump change. Moochelle has blown through much more than that on her jaunts around the globe.


12 posted on 03/07/2012 8:50:02 PM PST by Tucker39 ( Psa 68:19Blessed be the Lord, who daily loadeth us with benefits; even the God of our salvation.KJV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: U-238

Brings up incident of the Alaskan Airline Flight 261 and suspected Chinese knockoff inferior stabilizer carried in http://iraap.org/reports/alaska2.htm
Quoting: “Their technology and manufacturing standards AND their control/knowledge of downline product distribution, routing and handling is so precise the Chinese can in-build just the right amount of “defect” so these parts wipe out several years down the line; and specifically ONLY in those parts which end up in those planes which end up bought and operated by airline companies in the UNITED STATES!”

Now they get to not only knock off pets and kids but their guardians in military.


13 posted on 03/07/2012 9:41:11 PM PST by snoopy 'n linus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snoopy 'n linus

I believe that all US military equipment, with minor exceptions, should be produced domestically.


14 posted on 03/07/2012 9:48:24 PM PST by JmyBryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: U-238
So, we are going to buy parts from other than the manufacturer? Parts of questionable metallergy? Are they going to be parts MADE IN THE USA or overseas knockoffs.

I get a bad feeling about this.

15 posted on 03/08/2012 3:29:10 PM PST by hattend (Jesus wants me to make churches pay for abortions. - Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson