Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Military
HBC AT-6 not good enough for Air Force >

HBC AT-6 not good enough for Air Force

Search
Notices
Military Military Aviation

HBC AT-6 not good enough for Air Force

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-12-2012, 07:57 AM
  #11  
Bracing for Fallacies
 
block30's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: In favor of good things, not in favor of bad things
Posts: 3,543
Default

Originally Posted by thurberm View Post
When I worked at HQ ACC Weapons & Tactics we worked hard to kill this abortion. Of course, our protestations fell on deaf ears. Case of simply buying the cheapest possible attack aircraft we could find vs. one that actually handles the mission and can bring the pilot home. Another sad case of letting the budget drive the equipment and tactics instead of the other way around, and senior leadership ignoring the seasoned advice of their best tacticians. I'd hate to find out MY son got tapped to fly one of these. It's another A-37. And we were smart enough to ditch those ourselves way back when and give them all to the Banana Republics.
When you say "it" or "this abortion" which aircraft are you referring to?
block30 is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 10:20 AM
  #12  
Moderator
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Default

Originally Posted by satpak77 View Post
Me wonders how this is possible with all the MC-12 backlogged orders, and civilian King Air sales. Granted the Premier is not selling as expected.

Please shed more light on this !
What prompted this statement started with the fact that an all-hands company meeting was called in summer 2010 where Bill Boisture went on at length about how HBC is in the red because Embraer is killing them on labor costs. Many of the Embraer airplanes are more cheaply made, not less quality just cost, and it is a fact that HBC literally almost pulled up the entire plant from Wichita in 2010 to find cheaper labor. In addition, they recently laid off hundreds of engineers and workers. I recall having worked there morale was always lousy and people were bailing left and right for other firms. The very guy that hired me at HBC quit a week after I got there to name one. Also, my current boss is an HBC defector and he was head of flight test. I do not have any numbers handy, just anecdotes but I'll flat out state that I think the company is on a downward spiral. I would be curious how many of the ISR King Airs they are selling. Of course there are some civvy sales like you say, but not a ton.
Cubdriver is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 10:38 AM
  #13  
Moderator
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Default

Originally Posted by satpak77 View Post
Me wonders how this is possible with all the MC-12 backlogged orders, and civilian King Air sales. Granted the Premier is not selling as expected.

Please shed more light on this !
I would urge you to be skeptical of any aircraft company performance outlook statement based purely on back orders. It is a nearly meaningless number. There are a number of ways the back order log can be bolstered to look like something strong, when it is actually meaningless. It has no real merit until the cash is paid and the airplane is delivered. People always get so impressed by back orders. Cessna had billions of dollars in back orders in 2008 and by mid 2009 sales were so poor the company was forced to lay off half its work force, and almost went under.
Cubdriver is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 11:40 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
bunk22's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Retired Naval Aviator
Posts: 377
Default

I only know what I'm told and from my understanding, from a friend who worked on this program, the A-29 was the better aircraft. No details as to why though.
bunk22 is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 12:31 PM
  #15  
Working weekends
 
satpak77's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Default

Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
I would urge you to be skeptical of any aircraft company performance outlook statement based purely on back orders. It is a nearly meaningless number. There are a number of ways the back order log can be bolstered to look like something strong, when it is actually meaningless. It has no real merit until the cash is paid and the airplane is delivered. People always get so impressed by back orders. Cessna had billions of dollars in back orders in 2008 and by mid 2009 sales were so poor the company was forced to lay off half its work force, and almost went under.
Interesting. It is amazing how FSI at ICT is always singing how busy Beech is, Beech this, Beech that etc Kool Aid stuff.

Me also wonders how many, really now, ISR King Airs do we really need, in light of UAV's, and other solutions.

The King Air used market, I don't see many mid-2000's and newer models for sale. So that segment must be doing pretty good, or at least nothing is for sale. Read that how you want to I suppose.

I wonder how TBM and Pilatus are affecting HBC. Why spend 6M on a new 350 when I can spend 4M on a 2007 model and get the same thing. I mean, come on.
satpak77 is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 12:42 PM
  #16  
Line Holder
 
bcaviator's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: BE200
Posts: 99
Default

HBC delivered something around 300 aircraft in 2011. I'd say that's more than a "downward spiral". Also, a phenom 100 was leased to compare quality to the Premier and there is no comparison. The Premier won hands down. (this was not a media ploy, no statements were ever released about it).
In response to the MC-12, according to military releases it was the most flown airframe in Afghanistan, being a much more economical platform for ISR.
bcaviator is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 03:59 PM
  #17  
Moderator
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Default

Originally Posted by bcaviator View Post
HBC delivered something around 300 aircraft in 2011. I'd say that's more than a "downward spiral"...
Surely you do not think it is much more than one. There's isn't much lower to go than almost bankrupt.

Flying- Troubling Developments at Hawker Beechcraft

...Also, a phenom 100 was leased to compare quality to the Premier and there is no comparison. The Premier won hands down. (this was not a media ploy, no statements were ever released about it).
I would like to see a source on that. They would have to have ignored Premier's tendency for runway over-runs for one thing, plus totally missed the steep cost of manufacturing which was a point I made earlier.
...In response to the MC-12, according to military releases it was the most flown airframe in Afghanistan, being a much more economical platform for ISR.
I don't care how many they are selling, it does not change the near bankrupt status of the firm which is the central point I made. I never said HBC airplanes were not competitive airplanes in terms of quality, just that they do not appear to be as viable in the current world market. For the sake of American jobs I hope HBC survives. But things are currently pretty dismal there now, and denial of this fact does not help.

There is an old saying- recognizing your problem often supplies half of its solution.
Cubdriver is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 06:03 PM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
BDGERJMN's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Walmart Greeter
Posts: 694
Default

This program should have been left with SOCOM where it belongs and call it a day. The abortion was tieing Service dollars to the acquisition and FMS/politicians getting their mitts into the process. End rant...
BDGERJMN is offline  
Old 02-12-2012, 06:46 PM
  #19  
Owner
 
dbtownley's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: TC-12B (SELRES)
Posts: 304
Default

As my old boss would say..."This is a big chocolate mess..."
dbtownley is offline  
Old 02-14-2012, 03:26 PM
  #20  
Line Holder
 
bcaviator's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: BE200
Posts: 99
Default

Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
I would like to see a source on that. They would have to have ignored Premier's tendency for runway over-runs for one thing, plus totally missed the steep cost of manufacturing which was a point I made earlier.
I guess I don't see how a past "tendency for overruns" affects a quality comparison.
bcaviator is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Boeing 777-300
Flight Schools and Training
67
12-22-2021 05:46 AM
Riddler
Military
959
08-04-2010 09:17 PM
DWN3GRN
Hangar Talk
15
10-14-2008 03:32 PM
Herc130AV8R
Military
25
03-22-2008 05:22 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices