←back to thread

152 points lr0 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.615s | source
Show context
oivey ◴[] No.42202104[source]
It is strange how much apologia there is for Boeing in this thread. Why does it have to be somehow the government’s fault or somehow reflective of the actual cost to make the dispensers? Why should Boeing get the benefit of the doubt, especially given their complete failures on their fixed price contracts (Starliner, Air Force One, KC-46 tanker)? They’re so unable to control costs they’re talking about never taking fixed price contracts ever again. Given those failures, it seems safe to assume they’re screwing taxpayers on their cost plus contracts.
replies(6): >>42202119 #>>42202209 #>>42202477 #>>42202746 #>>42203237 #>>42203437 #
1. BigJ1211 ◴[] No.42203237[source]
Though I don't disagree principally. My experience with government contracts echos the much higher costs you have to make to get 'simple' things through. You end up jumping through so many hoops to get something cheap through that you spend much more on the process than the part could ever cost.

Granted 8000% is still absurd, but 1000% wouldn't necessarily be unrealistic.