I think they sailed too close to the wind, but there's always going to be an element of risk in some things. Saving thousands of dollars by using a PlayStation controller might be smart, and even make the sub safer (if you put savings towards a hull that won't implode). Some people might say that you should never cut a corner if lives are on the line, and if that's the case they can't complain about a $52,000 trash can, or that 5 major contractors are now the only ones able to compete for contracts.
Why don't you ask Boeing why exactly they need to charge $50k per trash can, before justifying them with an imaginary explanation of how their economy works?
If it goes on a plane, not as cargo but as part of the equipment: yes. Inflameable, certification paper work, corresponding risk for the supplier, obligations to provide said waste bin for, sometimes, 50 years after last serial delivery... That stuff adds up very quickly. Throw in low quantities, and the high NRC ammortized per unit, and that explains a bunch of said prices. Plus obligatory surcharge for being aerosp…
There was a major incident with nuclear weapons caused by pillows on a B52 catching fire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Thule_Air_Base_B-52_crash
The pillows were the fires fuel. The original cause was heater/cooler systems malfunctioning (at least based on the page you linked)
Why would it be? Making even consumer products is much harder than it seems. Just look at the myriad failed Kickstarter projects that tried to make consumer stuff. Even getting something normal made in China can be serious work. And far more if you actually want to do a good job of it. Linus Tech Tips put a surprising amount of work into making a screwdriver. Then consider that the military probably has a bunch of re…
Why would it be? Making even consumer products is much harder than it seems. Just look at the myriad failed Kickstarter projects that tried to make consumer stuff. Even getting something normal made in China can be serious work. And far more if you actually want to do a good job of it. Linus Tech Tips put a surprising amount of work into making a screwdriver. Then consider that the military probably has a bunch of re…
Excellent corollary example.
Making real, physical goods is very, very challenging, and I don't think a lot of the denizens of this site (as SWEs) appreciate that.
This is a reducto ad absurdum example of how the US government is paying out the nose to keep a bunch of manufacturing and development work on-shore in the USA. Yeah, sure, it's a trash can, there's no reason it should cost $50k. We're all agreed that's an absurd amount to pay for a trash container. The government isn't just paying for the trash can. They're paying for people to design, tool, and maintain that design…
Explain then how Boeing managed to stay afloat when it was forced to charge "only" $300 per trash can.
$300 probably represents the amortized proportional cost of the original design, certification, and manufacturing run.
$50K for a crash can is absurd, but $200K to spin up a production facility and get the output certified to whatever aviation safety standards apply to trash cans sounds about right.
If it goes on a plane, not as cargo but as part of the equipment: yes. Inflameable, certification paper work, corresponding risk for the supplier, obligations to provide said waste bin for, sometimes, 50 years after last serial delivery... That stuff adds up very quickly. Throw in low quantities, and the high NRC ammortized per unit, and that explains a bunch of said prices. Plus obligatory surcharge for being aerosp…
This doesn’t add up to 50k. Maybe 300. Probably not even
Well, you can take that from someone who does it for a living (not for Boeing or the Pentagon, bit still), or not. Your choice. Whether or not 50k is actually justified or not, no idea. But the price for a new, low volume, production of obsolete aircraft spares is orders of magnitude more expensive than the original high volume one. And even it if is old stock, as soon as the low contractual prices are running out, everyone is paying market prices. And those mean: either you pay, you don't fly or you certify an alternative.
This is a reducto ad absurdum example of how the US government is paying out the nose to keep a bunch of manufacturing and development work on-shore in the USA. Yeah, sure, it's a trash can, there's no reason it should cost $50k. We're all agreed that's an absurd amount to pay for a trash container. The government isn't just paying for the trash can. They're paying for people to design, tool, and maintain that design…
As a German, it always suprises me how pedantic americans can be when it comes to Letter of the Law vs Spirit of the Law situation. Yes, for Warplane Parts this whole Idea of keeping it inside america and enable local companies to continuously produce parts is reasonable. Having to receive bids for contracts as a public entity is also reasonable. But is there no one in government that can see that a 50k trashcan is just pointless? Is it really impossible to apply some level of basic human reason and common sense to such situations?
“Military spending is good for the economy” is basically the same as the broken window fallacy. There’s a massive opportunity cost
There's also massive benefits which are hard to directly measure. Doing advanced, completely unprofitable basic research, for one thing. These are the sorts of projects that spawned GPS, the Internet, and IC manufacturing. Wasn't super profitable at the time of conception, but the military doesn't care. They need capability, irrespective of price. All of these technologies are now keystones of numerous gigantic Ameri…
The US is at risk of being out-competed by nominal communists and practical authoritarians. They've already been knocked down to 2nd biggest economy adjusted for PPP and US government spending appears to be in a death-debt spiral where it pays for itself with donations from foreigners. The real burden of that is probably going to land on the middle class sometime soon and cause political hiccups that go beyond mere Trumpism.
Spending $50k on a trash can is unlikely to lead to the sort of benefits that are required. Better than unemployment benefits for nothing, maybe. The opportunity costs and time wasted on bureaucracy put even that optimistic spin in doubt. Basic research doesn't need 3% of GDP spent on overinflated contracts. It can't be helping the situation.
This is a reducto ad absurdum example of how the US government is paying out the nose to keep a bunch of manufacturing and development work on-shore in the USA. Yeah, sure, it's a trash can, there's no reason it should cost $50k. We're all agreed that's an absurd amount to pay for a trash container. The government isn't just paying for the trash can. They're paying for people to design, tool, and maintain that design…