In a bid to buy time, Boeing recently announced it is slowing C-17 production at its Long Beach final assembly plant. With the Obama Administration trying to end production of the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III advanced airlifter, the company wants to keep the line operating as long as possible with the dwindling number of firm orders already in the books. Boeing employs about 5,000 locals to build the planes and the recent decision could cause layoffs.

Boeing spokesman Jerry Drelling, provided www.OC180NEWS.com with the following statement:
“Due to a reduction in orders, Boeing’s C-17 program has made the difficult, but necessary, decision to reduce the number of C-17s produced every year from 15 to 10. The transition to this new rate is now underway and will be completed by mid-2011. This move allows us to reduce the annual production rate and lay the foundation to extend the line beyond 2012 with new and existing orders, preserving the C-17 as an affordable option for the future requirements of international and domestic customers. “

The “reduction in orders” referred to must mean a reduction in firm backlog, because, as far as we know, orders have not actually been terminated. But, Boeing is apparently scared there will not be enough political support in congress for the annual override-the-Pentagon contest to keep new orders flowing to the company. Perhaps the most significant aspect of last week’s C-17 boxing match is the fact that Boeing didn’t do this during last year’s matchup.

From our office here at www.OC180NEWS.com--which is almost close enough to the Boeing facility to hear the big four engine jets take off-- we think there is more risk to Boeing this year than last. For one thing, each year Boeing continues to build the planes, the U.S. Air Force C-17 fleet increases more beyond the number they say they need.

At the new slower rate of production, the Air Force will reach the fleet size of 223 planes, the number currently mandated by congress, by September 2012. The Air Force has said it only needs 180 C-17s. This slower production rate gives Boeing a little longer to line up more international orders—like the 10 plane order expected from India. Also, not that Boeing is lacking in congressional support for the C-17, but the slowdown gives the company a little more time to garner congressional approval for the Air Force to purchase more planes.

We asked Drelling what impact the production slow down would have on the Long Beach labor force and here is his answer:
“A change in production rate is likely to affect our staffing requirements; however we are still in the process of assessing that impact. It would be premature to comment on future staffing levels at this time.” Boeing recently announced layoffs, but these were not in C-17 production.

Since our Round 1 article of two weeks ago, there was not much new on the bigger question of whether or not the U.S. actually needs a C-17 fleet of more than 223 planes. Our 24/7 scan for C-17 information produced one published report which quoted Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and Senator James Inhofe (R-OK). This report generally presented the usual logic-defying arguments for buying more C-17s, which primarily attempt to imagine a cause and effect relationship between the vaulted abilities of the plane—which nobody doubts—and the need for continued production. The report also provided some, albeit it anecdotal, information about field needs for more C-17s.

Senator McCaskill was quoted as saying “we keep hearing…this is something that the military doesn’t want.… Then I go over there [to Afghanistan and Iraq], and that’s not their attitude at all.” Senator Inhofe reportedly said that “he believes America’s airlift capacity is in ‘dire straits,’ and that it is a travesty America’s airmen are still flying old C-130E models, despite persistent engine troubles.”

There are, of course, new C-17s joining the Air Force’s fleet every month. As of February 16, 2010, Boeing spokesman Drelling told www.OC180NEWS.com the Air Force had 193 of the planes. That fleet will grow to 223during the next two and a half years. This raises the question of how many are really needed. There is very little discussion of this aspect of the issue from either side.

As we did during last year’s C-17 boxing match, www.OC180NEWS.com asked the Air Force for an interview so we could understand the basis for their decision that they don’t need any more of the big planes. Once again, the Air Force put us off with the promise of forth coming information. And, once again, we were mystified as to how the decision was ready for public consumption, but the basis for it was not.

We received the following answer from Air Force spokesman Captain Joel T. Harper
“The study is an update of a similar study done a few years ago. This study--called the mobility capability study--is awaiting final signatures. I've reviewed the executive summary of the study, which is what I hope to provide you when it is complete, and I am confident it will provide you with the data you are looking for. I will continue to work your interview request, and hope to arrange something for you via phone after you've had an opportunity to look at the executive summary.”

Captain Harper assured us we would have the report in “a few days.” We will continue to pursue the elusive goal of getting some actual information from the Air Force on their need for C-17s. In the mean time, stay tuned here for our updates on the C-17 fiscal 2011 procurement boxing match.