quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
I am not shocked.
This is for one customer, the cost cannot be distributed for multiple copies going to multiple customers.

The engineers and other employees will be working on this when their time otherwise could be spent working on something for multiple customers.

The data contained within the manuals needs to be technically accurate, being safety related.

One off work is always expensive.

What do those here think the cost should be?
With the limited knowledge I have, I would have estimated $60 million.

Exactly. No where to distribute the cost.

I work with a couple Gov PM's and half their job is battling with defense contractors in keeping costs down. It's just incredible how they incessantly try to gouge the DoD. There is light at the end of the tunnel though with the non-proprietary open systems approach which will invite broader competition.

I would think two (already built) planes costing 3.9 BILLION dollars to be outfitted would come with manuals. Who in the f in the .gov is negotiating these contracts, a bunch of idiots.

For anybody who's done the math, the cost works out to about 7 hours per page.

Typical new development is 15 hours per page, reusing existing data is 7 hours, and converting usable data into a current format for military use is 5 hours per page.

The costs for that size manual are consistent with DoD industry standards.

quote:

Originally posted by 2012BOSS302:
I would think two (already built) planes costing 3.9 BILLION dollars to be outfitted would come with manuals. Who in the f in the .gov is negotiating these contracts, a bunch of idiots.

Developing operating manuals, training manuals etc are part of the work breakdown structure and line items in the contract. When there are no competitors it's difficult to exert any leverage. It's not so much that the Gov WANTS to pay, it's more that greedy civilian contractors want to squeeze every last dime out of the Gov. Don't wonder why the defense budget is close to $1T

quote:

Originally posted by 2012BOSS302:
Who in the f in the .gov is negotiating these contracts, a bunch of idiots.

You have no idea...

In my mind the problem is on both sides of the equation - the Gov't for being incompetent and really really bad at managing efforts AND the contractor for (sometimes) taking advantage of the situation.

But honestly the more I do gov't contract work, the more the problem is with the government - with contracting officers who are uncaring idiots or just fail to have the knowledge / understanding of the working being performed. I've seen them spend weeks of gov't time bickering over justifiable contract costs, that their time as GS-employees has far outweighed by doing so. So as a contractor it gets to the point of making hay while you can - which is what you'd expect when the customer has the ability to dictate what your profit margin is supposed to be.

So it's a shell game of different types of contracts, constructs, and making sure you don't get fucked over by .Gov - because believe me, they will screw your company in a heartbeat, without so much as listening to a reasonable argument. So when you finally get one where the chips fall in your favor, you fucking ride it like there is no tomorrow.

quote:

The cost had been announced as $3.9 billion in 2018, but expenditures for all military programs have a tendency to balloon.
***
A report from the Pentagon last year pegged the total cost of the VC-25B program at $5.2 billion for the two aircraft, including all the associated expenses. It’s not clear whether that includes those manuals.

You know, this doesn't seem like much of a contract negotiation to me....
The Fed gov (customer) ought to be able to say "Stick it in your ear! The price is $3.9 billion, as agreed, or you can keep your 2 planes."

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 747 AFM comes in several volumes, each of which is quite thick. The initial training on the 747 is 2+ months, for the type rating. In anotother wide body airplane right now, presently with 77 manuals, which vary from several hundred pages to several thousand pages each. Those are just the flight related manuals. Add to them maintenance publications, which come in multiple volumes of over 8,000 pages each. Fortunately, most of them are in .pdf, on an ipad.

Every page must be FAA approved, and meet specific criteria and documentation. Every single page must be tracked and verified as the most current, with a log, with each manual. Add training manuals, support manuals, manufacturer documentation and manuals for everything from radar to flight management systems to pumps, motors, engines, etc, as well as fueling manuals, weight and balance manuals, and numerous other features.

Altering, writing, or redesigning any of those publications is fare more than just printing off another copy, and to meet FAA requirements and get each manual approed, page by page, paragraph by paragraph, runs into the millions. It's why a new clean-sheet design for a light airplane, certified, will run in the millions. Just for a little two or four seat piston powered propeller driven airplane. Imagine applying that to a 900,000 lbs four engine airplane.

In addition to the above, there's also differences training, upgrade training, and other training aspects which must all have not only programs written, but compex and very costly simulations developed, all of which also comes at a high cost.

While an incorrect article attempting to make drama out of bad information sounds like a manufacturer gouging the government, its nothing of the kind.

Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0PlPptw9Ug


its a special order plane, custom

quote:

Originally posted by 2012BOSS302:
I would think two (already built) planes costing 3.9 BILLION dollars to be outfitted would come with manuals. Who in the f in the .gov is negotiating these contracts, a bunch of idiots.

...except they aren't the same plane.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigolicious:
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?

Because the engineers can't (or won't) provide source data that's mature enough to give to the tech data writers until late in the project. In this case, that's not surprising based on the types and complexity of the upgrades to these aircraft. Any maintenance or training documentation written prior to the completion of flight test is at risk of having to be re-written. Re-writes don't come for free, so the risk is mitigated by finishing the manuals later with solid source data.

At least that's how it works at my place of employment. Boeing may do things differently.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

The cost had been announced as $3.9 billion in 2018, but expenditures for all military programs have a tendency to balloon.
***
A report from the Pentagon last year pegged the total cost of the VC-25B program at $5.2 billion for the two aircraft, including all the associated expenses. It’s not clear whether that includes those manuals.

You know, this doesn't seem like much of a contract negotiation to me....
The Fed gov (customer) ought to be able to say "Stick it in your ear! The price is $3.9 billion, as agreed, or you can keep your 2 planes."

2018 was two years ago, any idea how much technology changes in the defense world in two years.

With new technology comes change orders, and change orders are the largest driver of projects like this or you stay with what was bid and end up with a new product using 10 - 15 year old technology.

Now we can add in cost plus contracts and things can get our of control in a hurry.