It's a "one-off" manual.

Given that all the procedures that are unique to this mission of the aircraft, the manual is pretty much a large effort requiring a large number of man-hours to complete.

It is not the same as manual/documentation of a series of aircraft with minor changes between blocks.

Having done aircraft mods for weapons development, and all the "orange bordered" changes to all tech data for a single hull number (or BuNo, in Naval term), that required a great deal of eyes-on documentation to ensure all maintenance, handling, and ops were accounted for, is an undertaking that cannot be appreciated unless you are part of the process.

It isn't as if someone slaps a decal on the side of a jet and it instantly becomes ready for the roll.

And FWIW, "Air Force One" is a call sign, not the aircraft.

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
My guess is some of that is going to other secret stuff. That's where the $600 hammer money went according to a friend of mine who was an auditor of such things. That's all he could tell me, I'm still here.

The $600 hammer in the discussion was a single line item expenditure for a prototype submitted for testing that was specifically requested for use on "explosive atmosphere environment", and the "$900 toilet seat" was specifically to refit Lockheed P-3 Orion aircraft onboard lavs, as the originals were degrading due to corrosion, and the "spares" were exhausted, so a contract went out to have components manufactured, and the cost per each was at that dollar amount.

The cost of the seat per unit is still a great deal less than restricting the operation of the aircraft to so few flight hours as to make its mission useless.

But, a salacious and hyped up story sells more soap than simlpy telling the boring truth.

Does that include the 3 ring binders?

Everyone here bickering about $84 million manuals and I'm just over here wondering why we are getting the planes delivered in 2024 and the manuals won't be "complete" until 2025?

Another thing to consider is that it is not just a flight manual. Approved maintenance manuals are very important and extremely involved for a highly complex one off aircraft.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:


"explosive atmosphere environment", and the "$900 toilet seat"

So then you're glossing over the issue of the toilet seat being operated in an explosive environment?

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
My guess is some of that is going to other secret stuff. That's where the $600 hammer money went according to a friend of mine who was an auditor of such things. That's all he could tell me, I'm still here.

The $600 hammer in the discussion was a single line item expenditure for a prototype submitted for testing that was specifically requested for use on "explosive atmosphere environment", and the "$900 toilet seat" was specifically to refit Lockheed P-3 Orion aircraft onboard lavs, as the originals were degrading due to corrosion, and the "spares" were exhausted, so a contract went out to have components manufactured, and the cost per each was at that dollar amount.

The cost of the seat per unit is still a great deal less than restricting the operation of the aircraft to so few flight hours as to make its mission useless.

But, a salacious and hyped up story sells more soap than simlpy telling the boring truth.

And, when you NEED a damn toilet seat, you'll pay whatever the market will bear! I'm sure you have all been there before!

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by KLGUY:
If you need a manual,you shouldn’t be flying it.

Real men...

It is the Air Force - if it ain't written down, they can't do it.

Watching them do flight ops is similar to watching an IRS audit -

"Well, you need for DD3746-74-A5, filled out by the GFR and Ops, approved by the General. All to start and taxi, just valid for today".

I thought the Air Force line was that no aircraft could take off until weight of the paperwork exceeded the MTOW (Maximum Takeoff Weight) of the aircraft.

quote:

Originally posted by Sailor1911:

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
My guess is some of that is going to other secret stuff. That's where the $600 hammer money went according to a friend of mine who was an auditor of such things. That's all he could tell me, I'm still here.

The $600 hammer in the discussion was a single line item expenditure for a prototype submitted for testing that was specifically requested for use on "explosive atmosphere environment", and the "$900 toilet seat" was specifically to refit Lockheed P-3 Orion aircraft onboard lavs, as the originals were degrading due to corrosion, and the "spares" were exhausted, so a contract went out to have components manufactured, and the cost per each was at that dollar amount.

The cost of the seat per unit is still a great deal less than restricting the operation of the aircraft to so few flight hours as to make its mission useless.

But, a salacious and hyped up story sells more soap than simlpy telling the boring truth.

And, when you NEED a damn toilet seat, you'll pay whatever the market will bear! I'm sure you have all been there before!

Like there is no other currently in production toilet seat that would work...…..or could be retrofitted. And most any non-metallic hammer can be used in an explosive environment.

quote:

Originally posted by rburg:...

So then you're glossing over the issue of the toilet seat being operated in an explosive environment?

I'm always glossing...

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by KLGUY:
If you need a manual,you shouldn’t be flying it.

Real men...

It is the Air Force - if it ain't written down, they can't do it.

Watching them do flight ops is similar to watching an IRS audit -

"Well, you need for DD3746-74-A5, filled out by the GFR and Ops, approved by the General. All to start and taxi, just valid for today".

I thought the Air Force line was that no aircraft could take off until weight of the paperwork exceeded the MTOW (Maximum Takeoff Weight) of the aircraft.

My dad was a financial guy for Air Force and later DoD. One of his favorite stories was comparing the CIA's contract for the U-2 with the Air Force's for the C-5. The U-2 was a single page contract. By the time the contract for the C-5 was completed with all of the Addenda, Change Orders, etc., the weight of the contract if printed out completely was more than the aircraft could carry.

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Another thing to consider is that it is not just a flight manual. Approved maintenance manuals are very important and extremely involved for a highly complex one off aircraft.

Yes, the flight manual is the cheaper section.

“The technical manuals will include more than 100,000 pages with the specifications for flying the plane as well as fixing it.

I always wondered since I watched this in the 90's, is there any truth to this one?




Link to original video: https://youtu.be/7R9kH_HOUXM

quote:

Originally posted by crue-dell:
I heard a rumor that the manual was leaked online. So I did a little digging and low and behold, I found it.

Makes my Porsche driver's manual look cheap. But you know the government procurement service is the same in every country.

1. Take the commercial price and add a couple of noughts, maybe three or four for better effect.

2. Never use one word where eleven will do.

3. Paint it green/light blue/dark blue with paint at $50k per gallon.

4. When it comes into service, immediately instigate a series of upgrades that the manufacturer had well in place before delivery.

Works everywhere, including with the Royal Air force - here's an example.

The then-latest recce jet used hi-capacity tapes to store imagery. How to download them in an NBC environment? Simple, get ONE person, kitted up, to plug in the cables to the facility. However, the video cables cost around £35K to supply to the RAF. They were inevitably in short supply - at the time, the RAF had three jet recce squadrons...

One of the guys in one squadron went to the local Radio shack and bought ten sets of identical cables for the equivalent of £35.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Boeing has a PDF version online of one of the 747-8 manuals. At 126 pages

Only 126 pages in the manual for a 747? I find this very hard to believe.

I have not done a page count, but I'm pretty sure that the POH (Pilots' Operating Handbook) for the V-Tail has more than 126 pages.

The D6-58326-3 REV BDECEMBER 2012 i 747-8 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning is 126 pages http://www.boeing.com/assets/p...orts/acaps/747_8.pdf

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Boeing has a PDF version online of one of the 747-8 manuals. At 126 pages

Only 126 pages in the manual for a 747? I find this very hard to believe.

I have not done a page count, but I'm pretty sure that the POH (Pilots' Operating Handbook) for the V-Tail has more than 126 pages.

There's likely more than 126 pages of legal disclaimers.

quote:

So then you're glossing over the issue of the toilet seat being operated in an explosive environment?

My toilet seat at home sometimes operates in an explosive environment.
Just sayin'.

egregore...I never saw the thread about Roy Halladay until Rhino bumped it with an update. After reading it, I now wish I would have become a pilot. Talk about a passionate group of guys.

They'll need a manual manual - a document describing how to use the $84M manual.