Posted: 3/13/2008 4:58:51 PM EDT
|
It seems like fairly often we'll have a discussion and some piece of hardware will be recommended that while meeting all the requirements, is impractical because the tooling has been destroyed and its more expensive to make something from scratch then reconstitute the line. The most recent example of this being the discussion about the possible 1380 freighter for the military, when the option of buying more c5's was mentioned the response was "Can't, tooling was destroyed". I've also heard this as a justification as to why we need to order more f-22's and c-17's with the logic being that we can't get any more once the line shuts down and the tooling is thrown into a volcano somewhere. IT seems quite common. but WHY? Is it just cheap companies that don't have an incentive to keep anything in storage, or is it congress as usual boning us? Please discus. |
Production lines that fall idle must be torn down & replaced to produce new products...Companies simply can't keep all that stuff around & in working order if they are not producing aircraft on them... The 'tooling' isn't just a few cutter bits & generic shop tools... |
So they can bid on, and build, the C-6. That's how the system works. |
I certainly see the economics of phasing it out at some point. Try as I might I can't imagine the government calling the warehouse and screaming "WE NEED MORE GARANDS!". (Trust me I'm trying real hard too). Though the scramble to get m14's up and running for the dmr role is very telling. |
|
When should they trash it? I mean do you really want to pay for archiving, storing, and securing telegraph receiver manufacturing equipment? It's easy to look at stuff in hindsight and say "I wish we still had it", but it's harder to think of all the obsolete crap you'd have to keep if you kept everything. |
|
If the .mil buys 500 aircraft and then doesnt want any more, you cant afford to keep that tooling sitting idle taking up your whole production floor. Can you afford to keep 10,000 employees on the payroll because the .mil ~might~ want to buy a few spare parts? Some of it is technology. When the F4 was going out, other companies were already making, newer faster airframes with avionics that could do 5 times what a F4 could do. if your company wants to stay alive, you need to move with the times. Nobady makes tubes for the avionics systems. parts were hard to get. |
That's exactly right. When you look at the "tooling" for example in an aircraft factory. Look at the jigs they use to make the wire harnesses. They are the size of the airplane. Look at the jig they use to assemle helicopters. They have several to hold the airframe in various stages along the line so each one is the size of a full size helicopter and they have several sets. It's not like a little punch you put into a press and call it "tooling". I know from some work in government projects that the contract calls for the destruction of certain items after your run of produciton. Not sure on airplanes. |