C-17 Line Closing in 2015

[Murdoughnut]

If you don't mind me ask, what do you pay for flood insurance? I have three properties and have the federal flood insurance program protecting all of them. It's less than a thousand dollars for all three for the year. That's cheap in my opinion. Then again I hope I never have to use it.

I just paid my premium for this year of $2k ... had been $1,700 last year. That in and of itself seems fair. The problem is the Biggert-Waters ACT that goes into effect 10/1. My insurance should go up 20% every year indefinitely after that. What's worse, though, is that if I were to try to sell my house, the new owner would now have to pay the unsubsidized rate from the start. Not entirely sure what that would be, but most likely in excess of $15k a year (not a typo) ... I've even heard as high as $35k a year for some properties in our neighborhood - which hasn't flooded in the 50+ years our homes have been there.

There's a couple not far from us who bought a home last year with $1,700k in flood premiums. Their new policy this year is nearly $18k. Simply unaffordable. Unless they change it, this will destroy our city - completely destroy it.

 

[wheelsup]

Now this guy is funny! In typical fashion, we are scrapping a good program that will keep our military a step ahead of every other military in the world, with no replacement.

He held true to his promise. We are all still "Hoping for Change."

Boeing divided up the production of the components to something like 48 out of 50 states therefore no self serving Congressman would ever shut down the program. It got to the point where the AF basically said "seriously, we can't use any more of these" yet they kept funding the program. It's just one gigantic example of government waste. Kudos for the sane folks in charge who saw the logic in shutting it down. At this point it was merely an entitlement program...

Edit, it is 44 states
http://www.lbreport.com/news/sep13/c17.htm

 

[jskibo]

I just paid my premium for this year of $2k ... had been $1,700 last year. That in and of itself seems fair. The problem is the Biggert-Waters ACT that goes into effect 10/1. My insurance should go up 20% every year indefinitely after that. What's worse, though, is that if I were to try to sell my house, the new owner would now have to pay the unsubsidized rate from the start. Not entirely sure what that would be, but most likely in excess of $15k a year (not a typo) ... I've even heard as high as $35k a year for some properties in our neighborhood - which hasn't flooded in the 50+ years our homes have been there.

There's a couple not far from us who bought a home last year with $1,700k in flood premiums. Their new policy this year is nearly $18k. Simply unaffordable. Unless they change it, this will destroy our city - completely destroy it.

That's Crazy!

Just curious can you take the "Oh well, I'll drop coverage" approach, or is it mandatory? Not just Gov mandatory, but I would imagine your lender might add it in if you drop it?

 

[Murdoughnut]

That's Crazy!

Just curious can you take the "Oh well, I'll drop coverage" approach, or is it mandatory? Not just Gov mandatory, but I would imagine your lender might add it in if you drop it?

The government requires mortgage companies to require it. So unless I paid off my mortgage (not possible) and self-insured, there's no other option.

The anti-tax groups are the ones fighting us on it, and I get it. I understand that they don't want to have FEMA in debt because of recent disasters. But FEMA also gives funding to those not covered (most of Colorado) - so in essence, we're all covered to some degree.

There are so many reasonable solutions not being looked at. For example, if I could set my deductible to $30k or something - that would make sure the policy didn't cover the cost to replace studs and drywall inside my house, which I could afford myself, and would make it truly catastrophic coverage. Nope - not an option.

 

[wheelsup]

The government requires mortgage companies to require it. So unless I paid off my mortgage (not possible) and self-insured, there's no other option.

Looks like people buying homes down there will be all cash in the future

 

[Murdoughnut]

Looks like people buying homes down there will be all cash in the future

There was quite a bit of that as it was - mostly investors. But I don't imagine there's enough cash buyers to offset the number of homes impacted by this.

 

[jskibo]

In steps Embraer with a mini C-17

http://news.yahoo.com/insight-embra...an-jet-takes-lockheed-101809924--finance.html

 

[mshunter]

Obama scrapped the C17 program?

The first part was for real. I don't think it's wise to not have a replacement. We have 200+ of them, and according to Boeing, they have a short cycle life.

The second part, you guys are too easy sometimes.

 

[swisspilot]

In steps Embraer with a mini C-17

http://news.yahoo.com/insight-embra...an-jet-takes-lockheed-101809924--finance.html

I have seen some of the crazy airports the Brazilian AF lands the EMB 110 (I wouldn't take a 206), I`m sure they don`t care about landing a jet engine into rough airstrips...

 

[///AMG]

The C-17.....which people often forget was derived from this beautiful airplane: the YC-15. The YC-15 was a competitor with the Boeing YC-14 in the late 1970s for a transport aircraft, only two of each being built. One YC-14 is in the boneyard at KDMA, the other is at the Pima Air Museum. Of the YC-15, only one remains on display at KEDW, after having been brought out of the Pima Air Museum after 15 years on display. It flew as a testbed for McD for the C-17 program, but suffered engine/aircraft damage during a flight over Palmdale, and was deemed uneconomical to repair. The other YC-15, on display at the boneyard, was inexplicably scrapped last year; thus leaving only one YC-15 in existance anymore.

View attachment 25195

Look at those mufflers

I remember seeing concept drawings and pictures of this thing when I was a kid......sorry to hear it met such an inglorious (is that even a word?) fate

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Obama scrapped the C17 program?

 

[Rocketman99]

The first part was for real. I don't think it's wise to not have a replacement. We have 200+ of them, and according to Boeing, they have a short cycle life.

When did the last KC-135 roll off the line? When did the last KC-10? What's more difficult to replace, a generic cargo carrying airplane or a refueler? If memory serves, the "newest" KC-135 we had while I was at Kadena from 2001-2005 was a 1963 model. Just saying.

 

[mshunter]

When did the last KC-135 roll off the line? When did the last KC-10? What's more difficult to replace, a generic cargo carrying airplane or a refueler? If memory serves, the "newest" KC-135 we had while I was at Kadena from 2001-2005 was a 1963 model. Just saying.

You must have missed the part where I mentioned the predicted short cycle life span of the C17.

 

[Rocketman99]

Nope, didn't miss it. I'm just saying carrying cargo is not all that much of a specialized mission. Worse comes to worse they can get "life cycle extensions" and get planes to cover vanilla missions. As it is, they have WAAAAAAY more 17s then they need.

 

[H46Bubba]

By Lockheed in Georgia, I believe.

Yep, they're still cranking out C-130J models. I live right by the Lockheed plant. I have a few guys in my class that are on the C-130 program. They're cranking out 3 to 4 a month. They're also performing SLEP mods on the C-5s.

 

[PositionAndHold]

Nope, didn't miss it. I'm just saying carrying cargo is not all that much of a specialized mission. Worse comes to worse they can get "life cycle extensions" and get planes to cover vanilla missions. As it is, they have WAAAAAAY more 17s then they need.

This. I'm based in LGB. Boeing has a separate facility across the airport from the main hangar and down a little bit. I think it is a depot level maintenance facility for the 17’s. There's always two or three parked outside there. They looked like they spent a night in Compton and forgot to lock their doors. They're stripped! They are up on jacks with the landing gear removed, engines, control surfaces, nose cones and just about any thing else thy can remove/overhaul. One of them today had the outer skin from the cockpit almost to the leading edge completely removed. I think they'll last a little longer than expected. Plus with how many extra there are in the inventory I'm sure they're not getting the cycles they had predicted at initial delivery.

 

[NewYorkophile]

Now taking bets that the Herk (a 1950's design) outlasts the Whale Tails.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Boeing divided up the production of the components to something like 48 out of 50 states therefore no self serving Congressman would ever shut down the program. It got to the point where the AF basically said "seriously, we can't use any more of these" yet they kept funding the program. It's just one gigantic example of government waste. Kudos for the sane folks in charge who saw the logic in shutting it down. At this point it was merely an entitlement program...

Edit, it is 44 states
http://www.lbreport.com/news/sep13/c17.htm

Put another way, earmarks are useless spending, unless they happen to be building the cheese factory in your district.

My senior-level research into how appropriations works was quite illuminating. In many ways the power of the purse remains the purest Congressional power of them all, and one of the most useful for creating effective change at a local level.