Air Force Thinks Twice: No aircraft plant for Jacksonville

[thelakelander]

The U.S. Air Force announced today it is setting aside a contract that would have brought at least 50 jobs to Jacksonville for construction of the A-29 Super Tucano.

The Air Force announced in December it was awarding the contract to Sierra Nevada Corp., which would have worked with Brazil-based Embraer to build the aircraft at Jacksonville International Airport.
But the Air Force said today it has advised the U.S. Department of Justice that it will set aside the contract effective Friday.

The government said in a filing with the United States Court of Federal Claims that the Air Force intends to reinstate Kansas-based Hawker Beechcraft Corp. for consideration of the contract.

full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-02-28/story/air-force-sets-aside-contract-would-have-brought-aircraft-assembly

[civil42806]

It would be nice if the AF could get its crap together and actually award a contact successfully on the first try

[mtraininjax]

So much for Alvin's Washington contacts.......

[acme54321]

I wonder why Beechcraft wasn't allowed to participate to begin with?

A T-6 variant that is probably the smarter way to go.  The Air Force already has hundreds of T-6's plus the required equipment and training to support them.

[BridgeTroll]

Beechcraft is also an American company...

[acme54321]

I thought the same thing.  Not exactly true though, Apparently Raytheon sold Beech to some Canadian equity group in 2007.  That said they are still headquartered in the US.

[BridgeTroll]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft

Beechcraft is an American manufacturer of general aviation and military aircraft, ranging from light single engine aircraft to business jets and light military transports. Previously a division of Raytheon, it has been a brand of Hawker Beechcraft since 2006.

...

In 1994, Raytheon merged Beechcraft with the Hawker product line it had acquired in 1993 from British Aerospace, forming Raytheon Aircraft Company. In 2002, the Beechcraft brand was revived to again designate the Wichita-produced aircraft. Randy Groom, now President of Groom Aviation LLC,[2] was President from 2003 to 2007, when Raytheon sold Raytheon Aircraft to Hawker Beechcraft. Since its inception Beechcraft has resided in Wichita, Kansas, also the home of chief competitor Cessna, the birthplace of Learjet and of Stearman, whose trainers were used in large numbers during WW2.

[acme54321]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Beechcraft

On 26 March 2007, Hawker Beechcraft finalized the purchase of Raytheon Aircraft Company from Raytheon for US$3.3B. Hawker Beechcraft Inc. is a new company formed by the Canadian investment firm Onex Partners and GS Capital Partners, an affiliate of global finance house Goldman Sachs. Today the company is known as Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (HBC).

So from what I gather they are owned by this Onex group and Goldman Sachs, but the percentage ownerships I haven't found.

[spuwho]

USAF is attempting to lift the stop-order that was placed on the aircraft order with Sierra Nevada and Embraer and to be assembled in Jacksonville.


Even though the the project was stopped, completely rebid and the Beechcraft solution was rejected again, they filed a protest saying the selection was unfair.

Now it is getting political as Kansas congressmen are teaming up to challenge the USAF decision. Beechcraft, which just exited bankruptcy and is headquartered in Kansas says they can bring 1400 more jobs in the US with the contract.  Sierra Nevada has published that they will only hire 1000 for the Super Tucano.

One of the issues is that the Beechcraft bid uses an engine that doesn't exist yet and therefore uses and older, less powerful engine. With the planned armaments to be used in the LAS plane, the Beechcraft failed to meet certain performance criteria, (too heavy for the engine) one the Super Tucano already passed. (this is the foundation of their protest, the bid was reportedly rigged to Embraer)

Per Aviation Week:

Although the U.S. Air Force has ordered Sierra Nevada/Embraer to stop work on the Light Air Support (LAS) contract that the team won Feb. 27, the service hopes the hold will only be temporary.

Lt. Gen. C.R. Davis, the principal deputy for Air Force acquisition, says the stop-work order was issued as standard procedure once the service was informed of losing bidder Beechcraft’s decision to protest. The company announced it would protest the Air Force award March 8. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has 100 days from the date of the protest to render a decision on its merit.

A service can opt to continue work if it demonstrates that doing so is in the national interest. The Air Force is reviewing whether it is justified in invoking this privilege.

The LAS contract is worth up to $950 million. The first of 20 LAS aircraft are expected for delivery to Afghanistan forces early next year; the program is considered critical to allowing the U.S. Air Force to begin pulling its own combat aircraft out of the country in 2014.

The order for the 20 aircraft and training is expected to cost no more than $427 million. But the contract allows for orders from other allies.

Sierra Nevada/Lockheed Martin won with the A-29 Super Tucano-based design, while Beechcraft lost with its AT-6 proposal. It was the second iteration of the competition â€" Sierra Nevada also won the earlier round, but after Beechcraft protested the award was overturned and recompeted.

Davis spoke to reporters March 12 during a break in the Credit Suisse/McAleese Defense Programs conference in Washington.

Meanwhile, Kansas lawmakers are questioning the U.S. Air Force’s selection of the Sierra Nevada/Embraer team, saying the apparent factors behind the decision were unreasonable and that the decision has national economic implications.

In a letter to recently confirmed Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Sen. Pat Roberts (R), Sen. Jerry Moran (R) and Rep. Mike Pompeo (R) expressed concern that the Air Force opted for Sierra Nevada even though the bid by Kansas-based Beechcraft was up to 30% less expensive.

[Ocklawaha]

One of the greatest fighter planes of all time, the in early combat operations, the Zero gained a legendary reputation as a dogfighter, achieving the outstanding kill ratio of 12 to 1. The official IJN designation of: A6M means; A=Carrier based fighter; 6=it was sixth such model built for the Imperial Navy; M= indicated the manufacturer, Mitsubishi.

One of the issues is that the Beechcraft bid uses an engine that doesn't exist yet and therefore uses and older, less powerful engine. With the planned armaments to be used in the LAS plane, the Beechcraft failed to meet certain performance criteria, (too heavy for the engine) one the Super Tucano already passed. (this is the foundation of their protest, the bid was reportedly rigged to Embraer)

GUESS WHO?  Yep, it's the Blue Angels!

This is kind of funny really because the engines must produce as much power as possible while weighing as little as possible. This is usually expressed in terms of pounds per horsepower (lb/hp). if you want a more powerful engine you could make it larger but then the weight becomes excessive, take some of the weight off of the components and they start to crack, break or crumble. Inline engines were replaced by radial engines for that exact reason, and radial engines were replaced by pulse-jet, turbo-jet, or jet engine. In the end the jet engine won out because of they're extremely attractive lb/hp ratings.

The fact that the Super Tucano could find a place in our modern military when virtually all propeller driven US military aircraft died with the last A-1 Skyraider, Cessna 0-2 Skymaster and the de Haviland c-7 Caribou, speaks to it's genius and the ever changing battlefield. Paradoxically, however, the propeller-driven aircraft's ability to fly low and slow for long periods is responsible for a rebirth of enthusiasm within the USAF about reintroducing the P-51. Quite simply, a slower, lower, nimble fighter or fighter bomber that can get down and dirty within a small target region could be the future in wars against insurgents and terrorists. This whole thing started when the USAF realized this fact and started actual planning to bring back the P-51 Mustang (our fast long-distance fighter from the final years of WWII). No doubt the Super Tucano is a byproduct of this planning.

I'm ready to watch them! My brother-in-law flew the Skyraiders in Nam, and I grew up on bases packed with big Grumman's and I'd love to see these new kids prove their metal. Bring em on!

[I-10east]

In other service related news, I like the way that no one is talking about what's going on in Mayport, and them getting the USS New York, which only has freaking steel salvaged from the WTC for gawdsakes. I guess that it would have only been noteworthy if Mayport DIDN'T get the ship and it stayed in Virginia, or if Mayport was in the vicinity of downtown Jax. SMH.

[Overstreet]

..........
virtually all propeller driven US military aircraft died with the last A-1 Skyraider, Cessna 0-2 Skymaster and the de Haviland c-7 Caribou, speaks to it's genius and the ever changing battlefield. Paradoxically, however, the propeller-driven aircraft's ability to fly low and slow for long periods is responsible for a rebirth of enthusiasm within the USAF about reintroducing the P-51. ................

Your examples are all piston powered. Propeller dirven turbo props is what they are considering. The C-130,  that control radar twin the Navy uses, and the  P-3 although being replaced by fan jets are still in service. The actual P-51 they considered was/would also be turbo shaft powered. ..... they were considering it back in the 70s during that thing down in El Salvador. In fact they were pulling up spanish speaking USAF pilots with propellor experinece for training duty down there.   The other thing abour turbo prop aircraft is that they can operate from less prepared fields with less support than more fuel sucking jet aircraft. They suffer less FOD. Although prop nicks can be a problem. But a mechanic with a file can fix many of those.  They can also operate with multiple fuels with some limitations.

[thelakelander]

In other service related news, I like the way that no one is talking about what's going on in Mayport, and them getting the USS New York, which only has freaking steel salvaged from the WTC for gawdsakes. I guess that it would have only been noteworthy if Mayport DIDN'T get the ship and it stayed in Virginia, or if Mayport was in the vicinity of downtown Jax. SMH.

Feel free to add a link or create a new thread to discuss or share whatever topic you feel is important. When you create the USS New York thread, place it in the Beaches section. Thanks.

Btw, the amphibious ships were mentioned in this Mayport discussion last month: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,14323.15.html

[Ocklawaha]

In other service related news, I like the way that no one is talking about what's going on in Mayport, and them getting the USS New York, which only has freaking steel salvaged from the WTC for gawdsakes. I guess that it would have only been noteworthy if Mayport DIDN'T get the ship and it stayed in Virginia, or if Mayport was in the vicinity of downtown Jax. SMH.

Sorry I-10, I didn't comment about it here because 'THE SHIP DOESN'T FLY' and this thread seems to be about new propeller driven aircraft. 

As Lake has said, feel free to post it - but I think you'd be better off with a new thread centered on things that float.

[Ocklawaha]

Your examples are all piston powered. Propeller dirven turbo props is what they are considering. The C-130,  that control radar twin the Navy uses, and the  P-3 although being replaced by fan jets are still in service. The actual P-51 they considered was/would also be turbo shaft powered. ..... they were considering it back in the 70s during that thing down in El Salvador. In fact they were pulling up spanish speaking USAF pilots with propellor experinece for training duty down there.   The other thing abour turbo prop aircraft is that they can operate from less prepared fields with less support than more fuel sucking jet aircraft. They suffer less FOD. Although prop nicks can be a problem. But a mechanic with a file can fix many of those.  They can also operate with multiple fuels with some limitations.

I'm with you 100% Overstreet, I didn't include the P-3 Orion or C-130 as I was primarily addressing attack or ground support aircraft... I'm a military brat and 'old Navy' veteran myself.  I think the differences in the 'prop jobs' or jets is much like the difference in a steam locomotive and a diesel. Diesels win out in most categories but when they go down you'd better have a well stocked shop full of experts to fix them. Steam on the other hand can be repaired by the village handyman and a blacksmith.

In WWII, the Japanese used a tiny 14 cylinder Sakae engine that our engineers said was 'impossible,' nobody in the US believed you could squeeze 14 cylinders into such a small space and achieve such amazing results. Today only one aircraft in the world is still flying with one of those original engines, a unique sound to be sure. Here is the last Japanese ZERO A6M5: with the ORIGINAL Sakae 14-cylinder Engine.

http://www.youtube.com/v/EeeyrAHaFDs?version=3&hl=en_US