Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military From: cmr@cvedc.Prime.Com (Chesley Reyburn) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Bat Plane Bux Message-ID: <13351@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 20 Jan 90 03:18:34 GMT References: <12850@cbnews.ATT.COM> <12981@cbnews.ATT.COM> <13218@cbnews.ATT.COM> <13315@cbnews.ATT.COM> Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Organization: Computervision Beaverton Oregon Lines: 46 Approved: military@att.att.com From: cmr@cvedc.Prime.Com (Chesley Reyburn) >of each aircraft--regardless of the project cost. We have already spent >the rest of the money(at this point in the project). It is gone. I do not ^^^^ Carl, did you ever hear about that fine old tradition of killing the messenger that brings bad news? >think that it is completely honest to quote the price of a single >B2 as 500 million. We do not avoid spending 500 million dollars by buying one >less B2. This is true regardless of the accounting, or where the accounting >is done. Perhaps Mr. Reyburn and I could reach common ground by separating >the costs of buying the ability to build a B2 and the costs of building B2s. It is easier for people to talk about one number than two. When using one number in your discussion you include both construction and development costs. When using two numbers in your discussion you are talking about a per unit construction cost AND a lump sum that has already been spent on development. Admittedly using two numbers makes entirely clear the fact that some money has already been spent, but my observations of the media and political worlds tell me that only one of the numbers will be used. The second number will be forgotten. Further, my observations tell me that the number that will be dropped will be the number that has already been spent. Within the above context I would prefer to keep the whole amount (development and production costs) in some form before the attention of the people who pay the bills. OK, so I maintain that my numbers still work. I estimated about $130 million for actual construction costs per unit. A %100 mark-up for incentive gives us $260 million, or very close to the $300 million amount mentioned by Secretary Cheney. Now, let me tell you about my stealth 747. By employing recent developments in stealth technology it will allow financially pressed airlines to avoid meddlesome FAA regulation at congested hub airports... Chesley Reyburn ...tektronix!ogicse!cvedc!cmr ECAE Software, Prime Computer, Inc. ...sun!cvbnet!cvedc!cmr 14952 NW Greenbrier Parkway ...sequent!cvedc!cmr Beaverton, OR 97006-5733 Phone 503/645-2410