1) bigger planes - more material to build it, more wiring, more
work !!! simple rules that you also can choose to ignore.
Economy of scale does not apply blindly. SBS and Trans operate what
buses ? look the private sector also have all sort of buses sizes
from large, mid and small. If based on your theory, everyone should
be following SBS and trans and buy the same model - economy of
scale - parts cheaper !!! But in real, that is not the case, other
models of buses still manage and get parts that is of good prices
!!! There is still different mid size buses and small size
busess operating, if based on your logic - everyone should use SBS
size buses, economy of scale, obviously that the buses owner know
better then you , if you don't have that load, why get a more
expensive and bigger bus.
lets not use the term economies of scale without thinking them
through ok ? 1 bus maintainence how much ?
say 10% of lifetime costs in 1 year ok ? 10% of 400,000 is
40,000. if you have a fleet of 1,000 such buses, you cut costs by
buying parts in bulk. reduce need to buy multiple parts for
multiple type of buses. common engine, common.
40,000 X 1,000 = S$ 40 million dollars. but by negotiating
for bulk purchase discount and reducing the need to purchase extra
parts, the bus company can save a whole load of money, usually
25-30%. that would mean something like S$10 million saved.
lets say if you got 5 different buses. all different models.
some cost 20,000 a year to maintain, some cost 50,000 a year to
maintain. you dont enjoy economies of scale because there are
little commonalities between the various models.
on the other hand, the fleet with 1,000 buses can save about
10,000 per individual unit.
lets apply this concept to the global 737 fleet ok ?
global amount of 737s : 5875 delivered (8000 ordered) as of
july2008 (source: wikipedia)
global amount of Gulfstream 550s :198 delivered (correct as of
Jan 2009, source wikipedia)
granted this is a extremely simplified explaination. with plenty
of engine and airframe variations. but isnt it pretty clear which
platform offers the long run cost effectiveness ?
take that 25% cost savings, multiplied by a lifespan of 20
years. do the math. even if it were a small figure, something like
5%, it still represents substantial savings in the very long
run.
wiring is a cost that is factored within the first production
figures, unlikely to incur additional costs subsequently.
economists would call this a sunken cost. a fixed cost which will
decline as the aircraft is operated.
2) certain work, need to be done in hangers, military aircraft
like radar plane cannot be treated like transport plane, sometime
you need to put them in hanger for tactical reason.
so PLAB can handle C-5 galaxy and C-17 globemaster but cannot
handle a 737 ? FYI, PLAB does feature ample hangar and civil
maintainence facilities.
3) storing of parts ? these are expensive item, usually people
just do mininal storage of those item, due to cost of item, cost of
storage, also obsolete items. Where you been ? nowaday, people
don't stock too much of expensive item, why pay for storage, when
manufacturer - can deliver to you when ever you need ?
dont mix up the JIT delivery model with military stockpiling. do
you even realize who is maintaining the G550 ? do you even know who
is conducting G550 pilot training ?
the point im making is, even if we dont stockpile, if there ever
was a need for 737 parts, we can easily get it here. Easily. ST eng
is a certified MRO company for 737 family of aircraft. im not sure
about SIA engineering but if mindef wanted to make a special
arrangement, im sure that would be extremely easy.
its all outsourced nowadays. the current trend is to give
defence companies lifetime cost + fee contract.
speaking about obsolete/cost of parts, the 737 parts would be
alot easier to obtain then a g550.
and FYI, STK and ST engineering have been involved with alot of
RSAF aircraft, especially MROs.