Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Two 747-8 Vip Passenger Jets Ordered  
User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks ago) and read 12977 times:

Two passenger 747-8 vip jets ordered? So who ordered them? Must be nice to have that kind of cash laying around.



http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...gy/2003290459_webbdigboeing05.html

49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4095 posts, RR: 90
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks ago) and read 12960 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

The more so as they are from a North American customer who booked them on the same day!

Regards, PanAm_DC10



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3493 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks ago) and read 12875 times:

I have no reason to believe this, but I'll throw it out there anyways...

USAF? The VC-25s are getting on in years...



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4095 posts, RR: 90
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12704 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Actually as these frames are now listed under Boeing Business Jets all BBJs are listed as North American as BBJ is in effect the customer and are based in North America

Regards, PanAm_DC10



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineYLWbased From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2006, 803 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12562 times:

so they are the first customers for 747-8i?


Hong Kong is not China. Not better or worse, just different.
User currently offlineAsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12533 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 2):
The VC-25s are getting on in years

They'll be around for 30 more years. Even then, they'll have low hours/low cycles.

Mark


User currently offlineERAUgrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 12150 times:

Glad to see 767 orders. I wonder if LAN ordered more?


Desmond MacRae in ILM
User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 12026 times:

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 5):
They'll be around for 30 more years. Even then, they'll have low hours/low cycles.

Very true. Can't help but speculate on it though. The number of units it's very coincidental and I can't imagine who else would want such a large platform.  scratchchin 


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4693 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 11888 times:

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 3):
Actually as these frames are now listed under Boeing Business Jets all BBJs are listed as North American as BBJ is in effect the customer and are based in North America

LOL! You got me there, friend.  bigthumbsup  To throw in something crazier - maybe Canada took pity on Boeing and tried to help jumpstart 748i production by replacing their A310s. Or Putin took umbrage at being rebuffed by Airbus and decided to improve relations with the US instead and swap his Ilyushin for a 748i. Or 10 Downing finally convicing the Minister of the Exchequer that leasing a BBJ was rather demeaning and that an Intercontinental is more beffitting for the Royals.  Smile



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offline747hogg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 11768 times:

Yes, I felt with the poor service and endless hassels involved in flying these days, I'd buy a pair of pimped out '47's for me and my fellow A.net pals to fly around and spot in. Hope to have um' in a few months..... I'll let you now. Cheers Mate! Tyrone Rock-a-fella

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21415 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 10685 times:

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 5):
They'll be around for 30 more years. Even then, they'll have low hours/low cycles.

Keep hearing this, but there's no basis in fact to support it. Low cycles doesn't matter here. It's technology and safety, and they aren't going to retrofit the VC25s they have. They'll get new jets and spend the 2 years to appoint them. The old VC25s would remain in the Air Force fleet for other purposes, once stripped.

As the first VC25 approaches 20 years old, replacement will be planned. Further, if they want a quad, they better get the 748i before it's too late, as it's the last quad America will produce.

Once the government 757s get too old (many years off), wonder what will be around to replace them?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineFlyabunch From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 517 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10013 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10):
As the first VC25 approaches 20 years old, replacement will be planned. Further, if they want a quad, they better get the 748i before it's too late, as it's the last quad America will produce.

At the time the VC25's were ordered, I seem to remember that even though the 744 was in the pipeline, they went with the 742 because it was a "proven technology". If that is correct, wouldn' the same thing apply here?

I personally think they should order it for the very reason you suggest. If they do not, they will not be able to ever get a quad again.

Mike


User currently offlineDYflyer From Norway, joined May 2006, 676 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9708 times:

What about the "flying pentagons"? They are getting fairly old. Maybe it´s time to replace a couple.


Life is like a book. If you don't travel, you only read one page.
User currently offlinePhxplanes From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 436 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9589 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 2):
I have no reason to believe this, but I'll throw it out there anyways...

USAF? The VC-25s are getting on in years...

This was my thinking. It would be interesting to see the first passenger versions of the plane come out as Air Force One.


User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4969 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9507 times:

You guys are kidding, right? The Air Force is going to order new Presidential aircraft without a competitive bid and in secret? Does anybody remember the Marine One presidential helicopter competition within the past couple of years? It was hard-fought and very public. So would be the VC-25 replacement.

To say that these aircraft might somehow need to be replaced anytime soon is just beyond cavil. Until very recently, they still flew the same airframes that took Nixon home after his impeachment, and nobody complained. The Air Force still flies C-5s and B-52s and old, old DC9s. There is a culture in military procurement of upgrading and refining existing equipment before just buying new. And believe me, those VC-25s are basically new.


User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9205 times:

Quoting DYflyer (Reply 12):
What about the "flying pentagons"? They are getting fairly old. Maybe it´s time to replace a couple.

did you read 1 single word of this thread appart from the first post?


User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2627 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8919 times:

Quoting Flyabunch (Reply 11):
At the time the VC25's were ordered, I seem to remember that even though the 744 was in the pipeline, they went with the 742 because it was a "proven technology".

If I recall correctly, the VC25 has the 744 cockpit.


User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8854 times:

Quoting Gary2880 (Reply 15):
What about the "flying pentagons"? They are getting fairly old. Maybe it´s time to replace a couple.

did you read 1 single word of this thread appart from the first post?

The VC-25's have been discussed frequently, the E4-B's have not.

Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 14):
The Air Force is going to order new Presidential aircraft without a competitive bid and in secret?

True, but there were other competitors around for the last bid (MD) and do you really think with all the political storms around A vs B lately that Airbus would be in contention? That just leaves one possiblility. A lot of other deals have been done in secret for the military you know.  Wink
 shhh 


User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8856 times:

Quoting Bohica (Reply 16):
If I recall correctly, the VC25 has the 744 cockpit.

Don't believe so, it's based on the -200 platform. -400 engines yes.


User currently offlineMolykote From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1337 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8543 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Flyabunch (Reply 11):
At the time the VC25's were ordered, I seem to remember that even though the 744 was in the pipeline, they went with the 742 because it was a "proven technology". If that is correct, wouldn' the same thing apply here?



Quoting Bohica (Reply 16):
If I recall correctly, the VC25 has the 744 cockpit.



Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 18):
Don't believe so, it's based on the -200 platform. -400 engines yes.

My understanding was that the USAF insisted on having a flight engineer. This ruled out the 744 but didn't prohibit the implementation of some of the lessons learned.

I don't remember where I heard this (some TV show perhaps).



Speedtape - The asprin of aviation!
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8502 times:

Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 17):

Thats me told  Wink

too many buildings flying around these days.


User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4969 posts, RR: 18
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8361 times:

Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 17):
do you really think with all the political storms around A vs B lately that Airbus would be in contention?

Yes, I absolutely do think that it would be in contention, and, moreso, that it would at least have an opportunity to bid. The 767 Tanker fiasco resulted in a positively Orwellian situation where the Japanese and Italians will be flying Boeing 767 tankers probably before there's even a decision on whether the US will take an Airbus or Boeing tanker. And, of course, what would happen is that a company like Lockheed or Northrop Grumman would be either the prime contractor or a significantly-involved contractor, just as with the tanker procurement.

"All the political storms", as you say, are precisely the things that mean that Boeing will not see a high-profile sole-source contract for many years to come. Boeing will not live down the Darlene Druyun disaster (which was stupid, stupid, stupid and completely unnecessary for Boeing to have done) anytime soon.

[Edited 2006-10-07 22:24:21]

User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8301 times:

Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 21):
Boeing will not see a high-profile sole-source contract for many years to come.

I'll take that bet.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8301 times:

The USAF would not order 747-8is from BBJ.

NS


User currently offlinePmk From United States of America, joined May 1999, 664 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 8167 times:

Well this is a guess, and just a guess, but with the mega mergers in Las Vegas with MGM/Mirage/Mandalay and Harrah's there is a need for large VIP jets. The Venetian which is only 4500 rooms purchased a 767 as did Wynn which is 2200 rooms. With MGM and Harrah's between they control about 15,000 hotel rooms each.

Just a thought.


25 KC135TopBoom : Why not? The USAF ordered the C-40B/Cs from BBJ (except the 2 C-40Cs they bought used). First, the USAF VC-25As are not full B-747-200Bs, they have t
26 Post contains images B707Stu : The liklihood of the US Government purchasing an Airbus aircraft for it's "Commander in Chief" has about as much chance as the A380 program failing..
27 Wjcandee : MAYBE SO. However, my point was that the Air Force is not going to buy two new planes for the President without at least giving the APPEARANCE of bid
28 Wjcandee : Or the Google guys decided that they didn't want to share a 767. However, private 747s would generally be considered too ostentatious for an American
29 Jfk777 : With all the Billionaires these days it could be Larry Elision from Oracle Corp. Paul Allen of Microsoft just built a Yact 400 feet long, has a 757, s
30 Post contains links and images DEVILFISH : Although unlikely, it's not inconceivable. Mere mention of "national security" would diffuse most opposition. Besides, with the A380 in the mess it's
31 EBJ1248650 : Not trying to be tacky here, but who are they going to compete against? Airbus? Illyushin? McDonnell Douglas is gone as an airliner builder and Lockh
32 SJCRRPAX : Ok, here is another wild guess. It's British Air. Here is my logic (or lack of), for years BA had been flying the Concorde between NY and London, char
33 Mptpa : That is what I thought at first, but then AirforceOne will be around for a long time... remember the B707 based how long they lasted!! May be one is
34 Wjcandee : Again, I didn't say that Boeing wouldn't *win*; I said that there was no way that the Air Force was going to have a *secret* contract with Boeing for
35 DfwRevolution : No, the USAF bid both the 747 and DC-10.
36 Boeing nut : In this thread.
37 Post contains images DILF : My guess is the Steven Corp. Did anyone see 'Airport 77' ?
38 DEVILFISH : It was just a general comment in Reply 17 on how frequent the VC-25s were discussed - the above qualifier was not there. It's logical one would not s
39 Blackbird1331 : Air Force won. Navy lost.
40 Gigneil : They're not Air Force One. Those planes are, from reports, reasonably standard with a few aftermarket add ons. As you pointed out, the VC-25s are dra
41 Futurecaptain : What North Aamerican private person would need 2 748's?? Just by ordering the plane it shows you must have alot of money? Perhaps we should look at F
42 M27 : Seems I read that the Laser missile defense system aboard a 747 had a successful test a while back. Perhaps the orders are involved with this.
43 Foxy : This is an interesting one as i can't see any reason for a private citizen wishing to purchase two
44 777STL : Paul Allen of Microsoft fame has two 757s, it's not unreasonable I guess.
45 Boeing Nut : The ABL aircraft is on the freighter platform, so if this was the case, they'd be getting the 748F. Besides, I think they have already purchased all
46 Amirs : Whoever it is, probably got the 787-9 as well. It was ordered on the same date. It doesn't need to be a customer from N. America. Boeing's "customer"
47 Wjcandee : Huh? There are lots of other things that are done in public that are far more sensitive than whether the president is getting a new jet. This issue i
48 Boeing Nut : Roger that sir, understood. This reply makes the most sense in this thread. Good one.
49 PanAm_DC10 : Actually sir if you'd read the post a couple after that I corrected myself; So as Amirs correctly points out it is a case of; Regards, PanAm_DC10
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Two Large VIP Jets In PHX Today posted Thu Feb 23 2006 23:43:50 by Redneckslim
More Private Jets Ordered From Airbus And Boeing posted Wed Oct 18 2006 16:47:20 by Manni
Iran Purchases Passenger Jets Despite Sanctions posted Sun Mar 5 2006 22:20:08 by Amiraa
Predictions For First 747-8I Passenger Order posted Tue Jan 3 2006 06:12:52 by BG777300ER
Why Super-sonic Passenger Jets Are So Unpopular posted Tue Dec 21 2004 22:41:05 by Thrust
Sad Two Weeks For Biz Jets posted Wed Dec 1 2004 23:31:03 by Coa764
Two 747-400s? Really? (Photo Comparing) posted Thu Nov 25 2004 22:10:23 by Thom@s
Airports That Have Lost Scheduled Passenger Jets posted Thu Sep 16 2004 03:09:42 by AirAmericaC46
BW: Is Boeing Bailing Out Of Passenger Jets? posted Thu Apr 10 2003 10:08:01 by Ktliem@yvr
Usps Charter Two 747's; Mail Troops posted Sun Apr 6 2003 04:33:19 by DeltaMD11