Boeing's Wichita plant to close

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

16 years 5 months

Posts: 459

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 2,163

Aviationweek

Basically Boeing f**ks over the US taxpayer once again.

The deal offered by EADS is only going to look better and better as time goes on. Boeing probably already realise there is not a hope of KC-46 being on time and on budget.

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 17

Aviationweek

Basically Boeing f**ks over the US taxpayer once again.

The deal offered by EADS is only going to look better and better as time goes on. Boeing probably already realise there is not a hope of KC-46 being on time and on budget.

From the very same blog that you cited....

"Future aircraft maintenance, modification and support work will be placed at the Boeing facility in San Antonio. Engineering work will be placed at the Boeing facility in Oklahoma City. Although work on the KC-46 tanker will now be performed in Puget Sound, Wash., the 24 Kansas suppliers on the program will be providing vital elements of the aircraft as originally planned."

The last I looked all of those sites where still within the US. The EADS deal was a joke. They wanted to sell the US a tanker whose capability they did not need and they offered to let some people in Alabama bolt the parts together that where shipped from Europe.

Clearly you don't know how to read and it affects your opinions on this subject as well as others. The work remains its merely going to other plants.

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 2,248

I'm sure your post makes the guys and gals in Kansas feel better rpm1962...

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 5,396

This is simply another of many examples of eliminating facilities with high production costs during the last 20 years. If a company is to win new business, costs must be kept in line with the competitors' costs.

The Grumman/Republic facilities in New York are closed.
Lockheed, North American Rockwell, McDonnell Douglas, Hughes and Northrop facilities in California are closed.
And now, the Boeing facility in Wichita is to close.

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 2,163

From the very same blog that you cited....

"Future aircraft maintenance, modification and support work will be placed at the Boeing facility in San Antonio. Engineering work will be placed at the Boeing facility in Oklahoma City. Although work on the KC-46 tanker will now be performed in Puget Sound, Wash., the 24 Kansas suppliers on the program will be providing vital elements of the aircraft as originally planned."

Clearly you don't know how to read and it affects your opinions on this subject as well as others. The work remains its merely going to other plants.

So what do you think will be the long term ramifications of the loss of another aerospace centre?

The last I looked all of those sites where still within the US. The EADS deal was a joke. They wanted to sell the US a tanker whose capability they did not need and they offered to let some people in Alabama bolt the parts together that where shipped from Europe.

Again, you are not thinking long term.

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 17

This is simply another of many examples of eliminating facilities with high production costs during the last 20 years. If a company is to win new business, costs must be kept in line with the competitors' costs.

The Grumman/Republic facilities in New York are closed.
Lockheed, North American Rockwell, McDonnell Douglas, Hughes and Northrop facilities in California are closed.
And now, the Boeing facility in Wichita is to close.

Agreed, nothing worse than a high cost, half utilized plant. I would expect there be more closings and consolidations just as there are openings such as the new Boeing plant in South Carolina for the B787 assembly as business conditions dictate.