£900,000 to paint a plane?

[garnett]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273255035284213763

I actually think it makes sense to smarten up what is a very drab looking plane - and, like it or not, image counts.

(Although it's a bit galling to hear Brexiteers (who screamed about paying Brussels without acknowledging what an incredible return on investment those payments constituted) now trying to tell us the paint job is an investment, and will make us back money in trade).

...But £900,000!?

Apparently it costs £1-200,000 to paint a plane, but this £900,000 includes a refit too.

So £700,000-800,000 (3 x average house prices) is being spent to make sure Johnson has a cushy time aboard.

All aboard the gravy-plane!

 

[garnett]

* Boris Johnson, members of the royal family and all future prime ministers who will use it.

Oh and good job bringing Brexit into a thread that has nothing to do with Brexit. Please keep your petty point scoring to Squabblers Corner.

Here's the most pro-Brexit rag, the Express, referencing Boris's own claim to need a "Brexit Jet".

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1...ager-repainted-brexit-plane-free-school-meals

..But yeah, "Don't remind us about our calamitous mistake!"

Mason- leaves the chat.

Back to the Echo Chamber. Blinkers on; fingers in ears.

 

[garnett]

No one mentioned how much it costs to renew the grey paintjob. Which will need redoing anyway.

LOL. First post.

Apparently it costs £1-200,000 to paint a plane, but this £900,000 includes a refit too.

Those blinkers probably obscured it.

 

[garnett]

Hahaha yeah you got him there! Someone posting on an internet forum after googling "paint plane cost", prefacing with "apparently" is a reliable way of estimating a non comparable, bespoke job!

"No one mentioned" is what he claimed. Not the forensic accounting you seem to feel entitled to.

 

[garnett]

Also have we seen the design, it might be relatively tasteful rather than the Austin Powers design you're assuming?

I think the assumption about a garish lack of taste may have stemmed from a few posts earlier...

Be great if they go full blown on the red, white and blue theme. I'm thinking of union jack printed seats, carpets and flags on the ceiling.

 

[garnett]

What they don't explain is that aircraft are routinely repainted every 5-10 years. The maintenance of military aircraft is extremely expensive, and this is no exception. I feel many people are simply seeing "Boris spends £££££££ on XYZ", look/think no deeper and become outraged. It's a shame because journalists could have done some research and explained this in their articles, but it wouldn't have received the same amount of clicks and shares so they didn't, and now individuals who have otherwise relatively sound judgement have had the wool pulled over their eyes.

Hush now, Comrade. Did you not get the memo about how problematic logic is? By showing your intelligence, you are oppressing the less mentally gifted amongst us.

The cognitive dissonance never ceases to amaze.

You're creating a strawman argument - that people haven't considered the normal maintenance fees - and then asserting as fact that the plane was due a overhaul.

So you're wrongly accusing others of passive misunderstanding while proactively making wrong misunderstandings of your own.

- How does anyone arrive at a place where they confidently do that? - It's a genuine question - I'm fascinated by it.

The plane was overhauled in 2016 at a cost of £10m, which they asserted would result in an annual saving of £775,000. So that overhaul was supposed to last it 12 years.

Cf - https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-b...on-pound-official-plane-idUKKCN0T80UY20151119

 

[garnett]

As Zefan says routine maintenance is pricey and includes repainting. Poor research standards and headline grabbing.

Ugh. Really? After I corrected Zefan already?

It was overhauled 4 years ago for £10,000,000 and that was seemingly approved on the basis it wouldn't need another overhaul for at least 12 years.

The only people conducting poor research are the people - like you - trying to dismiss this as "routine maintenance".

 

[garnett]

Probably should have been done decades ago rather than having standard military livery.

I agree with you, but the drab olive is presumably because of its shared role - it serves as a RAF refuelling plane when not ferrying VIPs.

How that will be squared - in terms of reduced funtionality if it's no longer doing that role, or in terms of its reduced effectiveness in that role if it continues - remains to be seen.

 

[garnett]

Oh the irony. Due to your "poor research" you've written that the aircraft is "drab olive", which is green, when the correct research would have easily shown that the aircraft is "drab grey".

Really? Is that the straw you want to clutch? My point really went over your head, didn't it.

 

[garnett]

@garnett I was editing my post while you replied, I've added a whole new paragraph. I know you'll still be annoyed by everything but there's some explanations there.

Hmmm. Not so much "added" to but more created entirely different point.

Oh the irony. Due to your "poor research" you've written that the aircraft is "drab olive", which is green, when the correct research would have easily shown that the aircraft is "drab grey".

When I mentioned earlier about "Internet Experts" vs people with real world experience I think this might be a helpful example. I get that you don't understand "why" we need the repaint (fair enough) as not many people will know that flying at 500+mph for hundreds of thousands of miles over the last 4 years just might damage the paint just a bit (Zefan wrote a nice post about it) but, as mentioned in the OP, the majority of the cost is for the "refit" which is for new/additional secure communications equipment rather than giving Boris a gold bath and a four-poster bed etc, which would understandably be considered a waste.

Of course if the complaints are just based on "Boris Bad" then no amount of discussion about this will make any logical sense.

You're asserted a completely strawman argument...

I say:

I actually think it makes sense to smarten up what is a very drab looking plane - and, like it or not, image counts.

You say:-

I get that you don't understand "why" we need the repaint (fair enough) as not many people will know that flying at 500+mph for hundreds of thousands of miles over the last 4 years just might damage the paint just a bit (Zefan wrote a nice post about it)

....And notwithstanding that, you fail to address the point that this thing got a £10,000,000 overhaul 4 years ago.

Happy to read anything you can post about the new/additional secure communications equipment...

 

[garnett]

If it was Corbyn or Starmer as PM and doing this, Garnett wouldn’t say a word. It’s literally just because it’s Boris.

Hah. So much fallacy in so few words. Quite a feat.

Tell me, have you seen this...

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/33697639/

... So many facts and events joining me as co-conspirators in the plot to make Johnson look like a mugger of the ignorant.

 

[garnett]

There's no "strawman" because there's no "argument" between us over the painting as we both agree the paint needs redoing, we're just giving different reasons for them doing it i.e me - because its a necessity after 4 years of use, you - because it's drab looking and image counts.

I realise you may decide that I'm making all this up but thats OK, thats your choice as you're not going to find an reputable "online" source telling you whats being fitted. However, if you are an ex-RAF aircraft engineer, like me, and you still know people in the RAF who work on MRTT, like I do, then you can ask them a question about all the "hoohaa" because caused by this refit/repaint and they'll tell you that it's a mix of "some new and some additional secure comms gear" and, being ex-military and knowing what friends still in the military can/can't be said over an unsecure app, you say thanks and leave it at that.

So I can't tell you what the actual equipment is and, to be blunt, I can't give you any proof that any of what I've said is real and not just some silly "epeen" game, I'm just passing on whatever info I can and leaving it upto others to decide if I'm full of poop or not. However if I had to "guess", and thats all it would be, I would guess that it's might be some form of BLOS/SATCOM upgrade, maybe with an enhanced "denied EW" environment capability. It might be getting ready for the MOD's new Skynet 6 system launching in a few years but it's more likely just new kit due to our excessive dependence on all the US SATCOM gear we piggyback onto, but again all that would just be a guess hence all the "maybe's/could be's" etc.

Thanks. I believe you. Interesting stuff. Would these contacts know the cost of these things? Who's getting the contracts? I'm not saying you're wrong, but there's nothing to suggest what you have to say negates what the news reports are saying. Both could be true - ie, some money is being spent on additional tech, and the rest still constitutes a massive overspend.

What are your thoughts (and the thoughts of your contacts) about how this refit is shifting what was a shared RAF/VIP role over to a purely VIP role?

 

[garnett]

The contract work is being carried by Marshalls of Cambridge who do a lot of the deep maintenance level work for the MOD and also carry out some of the bigger modification programmes. The management of Marshalls will bill the MOD for the manhours required and the MOD will supply the parts, usually.

For a generic "big" modification or update, which requires help from an outside company, it usually works like this - The MOD will supply all the new equipment via a BOM (Bill of Materials) and give the company carrying out the work a "modification manual" of how and where to fit this equipment and then the contractors will do the work (fit new boxes, new wiring, new aerials, new controls/displays etc), including some very basic testing (self-test etc). While thats happening the RAF engineers will get training on the new system, how to fix it and how to fully test the system including any the 'secret' bits. I worked on two "big" modification teams when I was still in the RAF, on C-130J's (secure comms kit for Afghan) and on Merlin Mk3's (LAIRCM) alongside both Marshalls and Qinetiq respectively, and thats how they were run. For the far more numerous "small" modifications, the RAF does all the work themselves and it is far more common to happen that way, I've done dozens of these smaller mods.



My thoughts - I see it two ways. On one hand it still can be shared with the RAF as it's still a fully functional tanker, just with a different paint scheme which makes no difference to it's performance (that bit is good), but the VIP fit reduces it's "transport/cargo" ability due to the VIP conversion blocking off the front 1/3 of the cabin and it taking too long to fit/remove the VIP stuff to re-role the aircraft for different missions, which is a negative (the original MRTT idea being you can quickly fit/remove things to match whatever combination of seats vs cargo you need for each flight).

On the other hand, while I think having a "dedicated" VIP aircraft makes a lot of sense and the MRTT is a great base model for that, we're stuck in a loop of "it's a great idea but costly, it's costly so lets make it multi-role, its multi-role so it's not ideal for VIP, lets make it VIP only thats a great idea - Looped forever" and I think the country as a whole can't/won't get behind the idea of a dedicated "UK Air Force One" due to the cost (it'd require 2 custom built 2 planes) so we're currently having to make do which isn't the best solution for everyone but it is the most financially acceptable.

Thanks for that. Easy to see how £1m gets reached. Consider my mind changed.

 

[garnett]

It's weird how people don't apply any sort of scrutiny to money spent on the NHS, even when their overall spend is £129,000,000,000 vs the £900,000 being spent on a plane.

Yes, that's right. No scrutiny of any sort brought to bear on NHS spending.



Just how thick are the walls of that echo chamber?

 

[garnett]

If you don't like what I say or what I think is trivial, don't read it, or reply to me.

Got to be satire. Nobody is this lacking in self-awareness.

 

[garnett]

It took off earlier, personally I really like it!

Looks pretty good to me.