Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/1093578/

Topic: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Shamrock1Heavy
Posted 2003-05-21 07:54:39 and read 3617 times.

My brother and i were watching "Air Force One" today and he posed a question. The plane is a 747-200 specailly modified of-course, but it is still a 747-200, old, yet classic by todays standards. Will they ever change it? to a 744 or mabye even a 772LR? This made me wonder, so I came here to ask. Comments welcome!

-D

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Ha763
Posted 2003-05-21 08:17:26 and read 3587 times.

Given the fact that the 2 707's previously used as Air Force One were flying for close to 30 years, it will be awhile before the next Air Force One will be flying. The first of the two current Air Force One's were delivered in 1990, so they are not old. They are also so well taken care of that they always look brand new.

It will also take several years to build the next Air Force One. The 747's were ordered during the Regan Administration and were not delivered until half way into Bush Sr.'s term.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: HA_DC9
Posted 2003-05-21 08:25:15 and read 3581 times.

Ha763 is correct, the aircraft are very well maintained and secured. Even though they are based on the 747-200 airframe, the aircraft have not logged on as much flying hours as compared to a regular commercial airliner. It is used only for Presidential flying and Air Force One doesn't fly as many daily cycles nor fly everyday as a regular commercial airliner does.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2003-05-21 08:45:31 and read 3555 times.

Will they ever change it? to a 744 or mabye even a 772LR?

Oooh, a private 772LR.... nice!

That monster could hit just about anywhere on Earth nonstop from WAS without a need for any sort of refueling. Shweet! Big grin

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Flyboy36y
Posted 2003-05-21 11:22:16 and read 3477 times.

Actually, I think the A380 is best suited for Air Force 1. No joke.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: BA777
Posted 2003-05-21 11:30:13 and read 3469 times.

Well, you think with all the AF1's being Boeing planes, they would have to opt for a NG 772 or similar really.

Henry

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Boeing767-383
Posted 2003-05-21 13:06:36 and read 3414 times.

i the middle of 2002 and 2 i believe on of the airforce one's had about 6000 hours on it

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Jwenting
Posted 2003-05-21 13:12:02 and read 3409 times.

Actually, I think the A380 is best suited for Air Force 1. No joke.

I think president Chirac will happily agree with you...
But the president of the USA shouldn't have to rely on an unreliable sometime ally to provide him with transportation...

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: RayChuang
Posted 2003-05-21 16:27:37 and read 3257 times.

If I remember it, the VC-25A's are built structurally so they have a lot in common with the 747-400. Besides, the VC-25A has the range to fly from Andrews AFB to Moscow, Russia non-stop easily anyway.

The planes are so meticulously maintained that they're in better condition than most brand-new planes!  Big thumbs up

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: EGGD
Posted 2003-05-21 16:42:20 and read 3226 times.

Nice of you to bring politics into this, Jt.  Big grin.

I think if they were going to buy something for long range, The A340-500 is the obvious choice.

Of course if they want to get somewhere quickly, picking up a second hand concorde would be handy. Plus they'd be able to fly it anywhere they wanted supersonic caus its the president of the United States of America, not some crappy British airline!

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: JohnJ
Posted 2003-05-21 16:45:13 and read 3220 times.

"Well, you think with all the AF1's being Boeing planes, they would have to opt for a NG 772 or similar really."

Not to fuel a 4-engine vs. 2-engine debate, but don't you think the Presidential aircraft will always have 3-4 engines to get around ETOPS issues?

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Greg
Posted 2003-05-21 17:03:15 and read 3190 times.

VC-25's can be refuled inflight....extreme range is not important.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: AA61hvy
Posted 2003-05-21 17:10:01 and read 3181 times.

I could see a 777 as the next AF1 with GE most likely as the engine, definatley the LR or IGW. No way it would be an Airbus, come on guys "freedom fries"  Wink/being sarcastic

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Na
Posted 2003-05-21 18:20:38 and read 3108 times.

The president stepping down from a 747 to a 777? Well, I hope the economical situation will never become that bad!

I bet that Boeing will have something more grand on the table when the current AF1s need to be replaced around 2015-2020!

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Srbmod
Posted 2003-05-21 18:25:02 and read 3102 times.

When it is time to replace AF1, it'll will be with whatever 4 engined member of the 7E7 family.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: Bmacleod
Posted 2003-05-21 18:47:19 and read 3075 times.

If you look closer at AF1's engines they are the same as the current 744, PW4000s.

[Edited 2003-05-21 18:47:40]

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: GDB
Posted 2003-05-21 19:13:19 and read 3030 times.

I thought that AF1 had GE engines, in any case they are good for another 20 years.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: CitationJet
Posted 2003-05-21 19:25:20 and read 3005 times.

When the AF-1 747-200 was selected, the 747-300 had already been in service a few years (-300 went into service in 1983). However, the 747-300 did not meet some of the requirements in the AF-1 Request for Proposal (RFP). The Air Force had total cumulative fleet hours, engine service, and other requirements that the -300 did not meet. Therefore the -200 was offered.

The reason why AF1 has in-flight refueling is interesting. The competition for the AF-1 contract was between the DC-10 and the 747. The way the RFP was written initially, the DC-10 could not meet the range requirement, but the 747 could. Then the RFP was revised to require in-flight refueling capability. This was done to keep the DC-10 in the competition, even though the 747 could meet the range without the refueling system. After Boeing won the contract they offered to not install the system and refund the savings, but the government said no. There is a book written about this by Chuck Fisher, the Boeing flight test pilot. I can't remember the name.
I don't think they have ever used the in flight refueling system on AF-1, especially with the President on board.

BTW, Boeing bid $250M for the contract for the two AF1 aircraft. $250M was the cost for two regular 747s at the time. They lost about $350M on the total project, but Boeing management did not want the President in a DC-10.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: JBirdAV8r
Posted 2003-05-21 19:29:01 and read 2998 times.

I believe the engines are GE CF6-80C2B1.

Topic: RE: Air Force One...New Plane Ever?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2003-05-21 20:28:44 and read 2942 times.

Not to fuel a 4-engine vs. 2-engine debate, but don't you think the Presidential aircraft will always have 3-4 engines to get around ETOPS issues?

What ETOPS issues? The 777NGs are to feature ETOPS330 (if Boeing can get the approval). That will basically negate any ETOPS no-fly zones except those directly over Antarctica.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/