Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
2009 RFP For New Air Force One  
User currently offlineAfricawings From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 110 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 17711 times:

All right folks, a happy New Year to you all!. I was researching something completely unrelated on the government contracting website, when I came across this real RFP (Request For Proposal...see below). It seems that The United States Government is actually conducting market research into the next generation of suitable aircraft to be designated Air Force One (for our future President) beginning in 2017.

The powers that be have concluded (as we had months ago) that the current VC-25 (Boeing 747-200 airframe) is aging and parts are getting expensive, and is actively looking for a suitable replacement.

I thought it would be fun to review and research the topic with you all (and to be honest, I think the insight from this forum would hands down beat any outside research group) to recommend under some "airliners.net" pseudonym to the Government what aircraft is best suited for the new job of Air Force one.

The top two real contenders in my book are the 747-400 and the 747-8i. Sorry guys the A380 doesn't really stand a chance for consideration given the fact that it is too big and is made in Europe. Other aircraft are two engine (Two holers) and as you all know, we've flogged that topic to death (i.e for security reasons the United States would not use a two holer as a long term long range Air Force One aircraft)

My personal preference is to select the 747-8i.

Let the informed discussions begin



---------------------
EQUIREMENTS DESCRIPTION
Presidential Aircraft Recapitalization (PAR)



PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION


The United States Air Force is conducting market research to identify potential sources that possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet the requirements of the next generation Presidential fixed-wing aircraft. The current VC-25 Air Force One, based on the 747-200 airframe, was purchased in 1987 and delivered in 1990 with a 30 year design life. As 747-200s have been retired from airline service, parts and maintenance are becoming increasingly expensive. The Air Force conducted an Analysis of Alternatives to examine if it would be more cost effective to maintain the current Air Force One, or to buy a new aircraft. Given the diminishing parts supplier base, increasing maintenance time, and system upgrades that would be necessary to meet future air traffic control requirements, it was found that replacing the VC-25 was the most cost effective option.


The PAR aircraft will be a new-build, commercial derivative, wide-body aircraft, uniquely modified to meet the current and projected requirements for the worldwide transportation of the Office of the President. Modifications regarding passenger communications, information systems, interior work & rest environment, and aerial refueling must be accomplished before delivery of the aircraft. The delivery of the first operationally capable aircraft is required in FY17, with delivery of the second and third aircraft in FY19 and FY21, respectively. The PAR aircraft must maintain the highest possible mission capable rate.


The PAR aircraft will provide the President of the United States, staff, and guests with safe and reliable air transportation with the appropriate level of security and communications capability. Mission communications must provide secure, interoperable command, control, and communications, using net-centric architectures.


The interior must provide a work and rest environment suitable for the President, guests, and traveling staff. The interior configuration must provide the President with ample work and conference areas (including sleeping, lavatory, shower, and dressing areas). The interior must be accessible to the physically impaired. The interior must be configured with galleys that provide the aircrew with the capability to prepare, serve, and store food and beverages. It must also provide for housekeeping and waste disposal.


The modified aircraft will be Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certified, and will meet projected aviation requirements to conduct worldwide flight operations in all civil and military airspace as defined by the FAA, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and Department of Defense (DOD).

132 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5111 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 17681 times:



Quoting Africawings (Thread starter):
The top two real contenders in my book are the 747-400 and the 747-8i.

No one is going to be delivering new-build 747-400s in 2017 or 2021.

As of right now, I think the A380 will be a real contender, but the Air Force will ultimately choose the 747-8I to avoid bad publicity. A lot could change in the next few years, though.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 17584 times:

If a four engine airplane is the only choice and it has to be a new build machine; and assuming a foreign design isn't acceptable for the President, doesn't it make sense to just make an announcement that there will be a new Air Force One in 2017 and it will be based on the latest 747 derivative? Are we certain a 777 wouldn't be chosen? Is it possible the rules have changed very recently regarding how many engines the airplane has to have?


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5611 posts, RR: 45
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 17579 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 2):
Is it possible the rules have changed very recently regarding how many engines the airplane has to have?

Was it ever actually a "rule" or a commonly held perception that the Presidential aircraft must have four engines.
A perception that would not have been questioned in earlier times.

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12050 posts, RR: 47
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 17479 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A link for those interested: Click here


Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 17461 times:

It has to be big & build in America.

Then ETOPS with higher risk for diversions & MANPAD threads is out of the question IMO.

If the president of EU was allawed to have an aircraft the most likely candidate would probably be an A340-500 or A340-600.

Congress will make sure it become a reworked 747-400 or 747-8i. Maybe even a 747-8F fuselage based VVIP if the 8i doesn't make it.



User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7214 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 17414 times:

It is hard to see an AF1 that is non Boeing. IMO politically impossible. Look at the whole KC-X saga.

By 2017, the B747-400, (as a design) is going to be pretty long in the tooth. Most except possibly the B747-400ER's will be pretty elderly.

Given that the USAF will not buy off the drawing board, the it will be a type that is currently in or approaching EIS.

That means that the choice comes down to the B747-8, B777 or B787.

1. Both the B777 and B787 are twins which raises issues if an engines fails for any reason.

2. Furthermore they are smaller than the existing AF1. Whilst the size of Electronics shrinks, I
do not see this resulting in smaller aircraft, just more capable ones.

3. Is the POTUS going to arrive in a B787, when other world leaders have A340 or B747. I think not.

IMO, It comes down to the B747-8I and the B747-8F. Always bearing in mind that the interior will be mostly custom built.


User currently offlineGST From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 930 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 17332 times:

If they use an F version aircraft that gives advantages of pallet loading the press. Joking aside, they may publically look at an A380 or perhaps even A340 as options, but in the end it will ahve to be a US design. Two holers are out for "safety" reasons (though if you ask me if you double the engines you double the risk of engine failiure). The 747-400 wont be in production in 2017 surely, so that leaves the 747-800 derivatives only IMO. TBH I see the F version being a much better blank canvas for their proposed modifications than the I.

User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 17327 times:



Quoting GST (Reply 7):
I see the F version being a much better blank canvas for their proposed modifications than the I.

Too many problems using the 748F. Just to name a few, no windows, nose door, smaller hump, reinforced floor. All of those changes will require additional expense to have the aircraft certified by the FAA. Using the 748I is a 'no brainer". The current 747-400s used for AF1 have a space problem on the upper deck with all the comm gear. Having the extended upper deck would allow a better comm suite.

In addition, plan on about a 40 ton increase in the ZFW for the outfitted aircraft compared with a standard 748I. Little things like EMP hardening, 2nd APU, ECM and Comm gear all add up!


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 17301 times:



Quoting GST (Reply 7):
The 747-400 wont be in production in 2017 surely, so that leaves the 747-800 derivatives only IMO. TBH I see the F version being a much better blank canvas for their proposed modifications than the I.

Boeing has already told the USAF that any new-build 747's would have to be the 748. That was as they related to the ABL but the Presidential aircraft would be no different.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 8):
The current 747-400s used for AF1 have a space problem on the upper deck with all the comm gear. Having the extended upper deck would allow a better comm suite.

The VC-25s are 747-200s without the SUD option. I don't know why they didn't get the super upper deck on them.



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3434 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 17290 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well I've got to comment on this AF1 thread, though I generally try to stay out of them, as it seems we now have an actual RFP....

As for the rationale for replacement... Spares availability was given as reason for a new aircraft when the VC-25s were ordered... Strangely enough the 89th AW had no problem keeping 26000 & 27000 going for another decade after they were replaced as the AF1 aircraft & DoD has managed to keep the E-3s, E-6s, and E-8s going - no shortage of 707 spares there... The actual reasons for the retirement of the VC-137s (and I'm referring to all of them not just 26000 & 27000) were corrosion, aircraft noise, reliability, and a changing mission requirement...

I would suggest the real reason for this RFP is that USAF sees the possibility that the 747 line may close in the next 3 - 4 years and along with that closure may come the last chance (for the forseeable future) to order a U.S. aircraft that meets the size, range, and three/four engine requirement. The RFP preserves the possibility to have a U.S. aircraft to replace the VC-25s that in the out years will be 30+ years old.

I find it curious that the RFP mentions the possibility of a third aircraft.



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 17275 times:



Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 9):
The VC-25s are 747-200s without the SUD option.

The only classic with the SUD option is called the 747-300. That would have been a disaster to use because of the increased ZFW of the stretched upper deck. There were a couple of STCs out to convert the shorter upper deck to the stretch, but there was no Boeing option.


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 17256 times:



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 11):

Yeah, I thought Boeing offered it on later new-build 742s but apparently I was confusing that with the upper deck window option.  Smile



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3434 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 17198 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 11):
There were a couple of STCs out to convert the shorter upper deck to the stretch, but there was no Boeing option.

Did anybody other than Boeing ever do the upper deck stretch??



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21422 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 17161 times:

Yep. And AF1s will be old by then, by traditional standards (if you do the math, you'll see what I mean). I'm surprised the RFP wasn't issued 4 years ago.

I believe it will be the 747 simply because it is an american aircraft and it would look bad to be flying an A380 around (no support for our own products). Same reason congresspeople drive American cars even if they don't want to. The planes would be produced in 2014 then refitted/specialized for 2-4 more years before entering service.

Also, it will be an easier transition if AF moves from 742s to 748s.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 915 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 17156 times:

The President, Vice President, and Secretaries fly on twin-jets all the time. The 777 isn't out just because it's a twin. The White House has the need for something bigger than a 773ER. When the public thinks Air Force One, they think of the 747. That image of Presidential power is what trumps the A380.

It'll be the 747-8I.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21422 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 17148 times:



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
That image of Presidential power is what trumps the A380.

It'll be the 747-8I.

That's part of it. And with the hump and the length, when not parked side by side, the 748 looks large and in charge.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3434 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 17137 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
The President, Vice President, and Secretaries fly on twin-jets all the time.

The President (and generally SecDef as well) only fly twins domestically. Overseas travel is always 4 engine.....

For diplomatic & protocol reasons alone it would be unacceptable for AF1 to divert in the engine out case

[Edited 2009-01-08 10:33:54]


Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4482 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 17121 times:



Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 17):

The President (and generally SecDef as well) only fly twins domestically

Right, and then generally only when they have to. If they can take the VC-25 they do it.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 915 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 17098 times:



Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 17):
The President (and generally SecDef as well) only fly twins domestically. Overseas travel is always 4 engine.....

The President takes the VC-25 overseas because of the size of his entourage. There isn't a twin in USAF service that would be adequate. The VP and Secretaries who have a smaller team have traveled overseas with the C-32 and C-40s a number of times.

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 17):
For diplomatic & protocol reasons alone it would be unacceptable for AF1 to divert in the engine out case

It's not like the Secret Service doesn't prepare diversion plans for the VC-25. Engine-out scenarios aren't the only reason they would need to land unexpectedly. The President is also followed by additional aircraft anyway, so getting stranded is a non-issue. These days twins reach their destination more often than quads in airline service. In the meticulous hands of the USAF, there's no reason to believe a twin would be any less safe or diversion prone.

What kills the 777 and other twins is size, or lack thereof.


User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3434 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 17083 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 19):
The President takes the VC-25 overseas because of the size of his entourage. There isn't a twin in USAF service that would be adequate. The VP and Secretaries who have a smaller team have traveled overseas with the C-32 and C-40s a number of times.

The entourage that travels aboard AF1 is not as big as you think

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 19):
so getting stranded is a non-issue.

Getting stranded is not the issue. Arriving unexpectedly at short notice is. A single engine shutdown on the 747 is pretty much a non event, they wouldn't even need to brief pax. Might even have occurred with the VC-25 in the past and nobody outside the Oval Office and the PPG knows.... With a twin it would be a different story. Short notice arrival at the divert field means: Protocol arrangements, security concerns, diplomatic issues, transportation and housing arrangements, etc all change at the last minute.

ZANL
1992-1996 - Transportation supervisor/planner with the AF1 detail at ADW



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineAfricawings From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 17020 times:

This is really good stuff!

Any chance the USAF looks at the 777-LR or the 777-300ER for the role?

They have the size and the range don't they?


User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2643 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16978 times:



Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 6):
It is hard to see an AF1 that is non Boeing. IMO politically impossible.

Just out of curiosity, what is the official aircraft of the heads of the United Kingdom, France, Germany & Spain? Is it only Airbus?


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2867 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16957 times:



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 11):
The only classic with the SUD option is called the 747-300.

Actually there are 742 SUD's (Ex KLM) and I think JAL had 741SUD's, now operated by Orient Thai..

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lasse Kaila




The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5611 posts, RR: 45
Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16909 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting United787 (Reply 22):
Just out of curiosity, what is the official aircraft of the heads of the United Kingdom, France, Germany & Spain? Is it only Airbus?

Can't speak for the others but the UK does not have a long haul aircraft for the Head of Govt or Head of State, they usually charter a BA aircraft, quite often a B777

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
25 Bennett123 : France has 3 used A310, 2 new A319 and 2 used A340. However given the role of AF1, I think that the USAF will need to buy a new plane.
26 Keesje : Imagine the USAF sends out RFP and Airbus comes back with a better cheaper proposal. Where's the beer and pop corn again.. Can't the currents ones be
27 Post contains links RomeoKC10FE : Not true, Dash 200's could be ordered with the Stretched Upper Deck, trust me, I fly them for my airline. Here's a good link. http://www.flightglobal
28 KC135TopBoom : The UK charters a BA B-777-200 or B-747-400. France bought a used A-340-200, and also has A-318CJs and A-319CJs. Germay has two A-310-300s, as does C
29 Nomadd22 : Kind of a sideways question here. In a WWIII type situation where time aloft would be more of a factor than distance covered, would AF1 go to two thru
30 Par13del : This the same congress than ensured that POTUS flies around in a European helicopter assembled by American workers? How come this did not apply to th
31 Venus6971 : I guess the USAF will finally get the enlisted man out of the cockpit by getting a new Airbus or Boeing without a FE position. But from my point of vi
32 Columba : The A340 of France is not an VIP aircraft it is in airliner configuration and used to carry troops. France will get an used A332 as new VIP aircraft
33 Post contains links PhilSquares : I suggest you take a look at http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/specs.html You eill find there is NO SUD option for new build aircraft. The o
34 PhilSquares : The 300 has the same MTOW as the 200, which is 830,000lbs whild the 400 is 875,000 so the 400 is more capable. The cockpit is the same as it is on al
35 Post contains links Kappel : http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...for-air-force-one-replacement.html According to this article the USAF has requested (and received) detailed inf
36 Post contains images Keesje : If think if Airbus proposes a similar price or a few % less for a proven A380 then Boeing for a paper 747-8i, there is an issue. Congress will fight t
37 Spacepope : The only problem with that is the RFP clearly states that it must be a new build airframe. No way for the ex Qantas aircraft, and Boeing has stopped
38 Francoflier : I'm betting Airbus will carefully test the water this time around before plunging head first into another RFP for the USAF... Especially for 'only' 3
39 Post contains images ShyFlyer : In a scenario like this, the aircraft's mid-air refueling capabilities would be utilized should there be a need to keep AF1 airborne for extended per
40 Ssublyme : Not true. Your total chance of atleast one engine failing might be higher, but not double. Redundancy is where you get a benefit of a quad. Which is
41 SCAT15F : I think this would be a great option as long as the -400ER is re-equipped with the GEnx. Having a "green" AF1 would be important on the stage of worl
42 MCIGuy : I would think there's just too much custom work to even consider a used frame. They'd have to tear the thing completely down to install all the stuff
43 Bennett123 : I agree that a lot of people are missing the obvious here. AF1 is not a passenger jet, it is a flying White House. Consequently it must be a New Build
44 Stitch : I don't buy the "prestige means big" argument. I mean the President tooled around for decades in a 707 when the DC-10, L1011 and 747-100 and 747-200 w
45 Nomadd22 : Because if you want to commit political suicide there are a lot easier ways to do it.
46 Stitch : It didn't stop the USMC from buying European to shuttle the President to and from the VC-25. And it didn't stop the USAF from buying European to refu
47 Gsosbee : The USAF selected the Airbus aircraft; Boeing and political pressure killed the deal. If (and this is a big if) there are any new tankers, they will
48 KC135TopBoom : By the time these airplanes are ordered, in 2014, the B-747-8i will not be a paper airplane. LH will have at least 20 of them, there will also be sev
49 Flighty : This is probably true. Boeing will determine what the next AF1 looks like, what it costs and how it is equipped. Boeing probably wants to sell some m
50 Francoflier : I agree. And it raises the question of why they bother organizing an RFP and why they ask for data from EADS at all... Political correctness I suppos
51 Dw747400 : According to that, there is no 747SP either... I was always under the impression that from a paperwork standpoint, the SUD conversion was an STC, but
52 ZANL188 : Required by law. USAF can't buy a laser printer without showing that it evaluated all available options.
53 Scbriml : Strictly speaking, they haven't. The RFP is open, EADS may decide to submit a proposal, or they may not.
54 Post contains links PhilSquares : Here is everything that was offered "new" by Boeing. The SUD on the classic was a STC, but I don't think it was every applied to any new delivery air
55 ZANL188 : Good link!! Found this interesting bit on page 9: "The 747-200/-300 has had several highly publicised, major structural modification programmes. The
56 Post contains images A342 : Airbus wouldn't do anything but supply green aircraft. Equipping them would probably be the responsibility of Northrop-Grumman (or maybe Lockheed-Mar
57 Par13del : This the reason why the Boeing YF-22 beat out the F-22 for the latest US Air Force fighter a/c, ditto Boeing replacement for the F-16 and A-10, the C
58 Dw747400 : Thats possible--especially if launch orders were placed as 747-200SUDs. That would explain seeing "XYZ Air purchased X Boeing 747-200SUDs". By the ti
59 PC12Fan : I was under the impression that the VC-25 crew practiced refueling on E4-B's and not the VC-25's?
60 Par13del : Not an expert but I would think that they would have to practise at least once or twice on the actual a/c, take it out just for that. Each a/c has it
61 Moose135 : Not only that, but you want to refuel the VC-25 now and then to make sure the receiver equipment works properly. Nothing worse than needing it in a "
62 Post contains images ZANL188 : I won't say that the VC-25 never does aerial refueling... but it's obvious from the condition of the receptacle which aircraft (VC-25 / E-4) does mor
63 Post contains links and images Bsergonomics : Since his predecessor has just spent $xxx Trillion on wars, given $750 billion to incompetent banks and $14 billion to car manufacturers, I suspect th
64 Gsosbee : Different level of maintenance on the airplanes. The E-4 is a line aircraft and as such gets bumped around just like the remainder of the fleet. On th
65 Columba : I doubt it, just think how the media could spin it that the US President flies in a rebuild freighter aircraft. If it will be the 747-8 then it will
66 ZANL188 : No it isn't. Cleaned after a flight - yes. Paint touched up post flight.. perhaps. Still if they were A/Ring as often as folks are suggesting there w
67 DEVILFISH : They might say it's a specially built and strengthened plane, but still definitely brand-new. And how cool would it be that the presidential limousin
68 Gsosbee : I believe that there is plenty of evidence in the public arena that shows that it is. Sim and "like" aircraft connects are no replacement for a minim
69 PhilSquares : I have a very good friend who flew the Old AF1 and the current AF1. I can assure you the receiver training and currency is done in the E-4. AF-1 very
70 Gsosbee : Cannot work that way as the two airplanes are different. End of discussion as a twice a year flight should not distract from the subject of the threa
71 PhilSquares : Despite your edict you are mistaken. Currency is a 45 day item for day and a 90 day item for night. I have verified with my friend who flew under Rea
72 ShyFlyer : Marine One isn't the superstar of the presidential fleet.
73 Venus6971 : During my time when they were using 26000 and 27000 when they flew dashes and crashes if it was any precipitation they kept them in the hanger and di
74 LifelinerOne : Ah yes, maybe the Northrop-Grumman VC-380 will have a chance! Cheers!
75 Bennett123 : A342 The French already fly Boeing Tankers, (KC135FR). David
76 A342 : Sure, but at that time there was no French/European alternative to the KC-135. Politically speaking, nowadays France is more unlikely to buy Boeing t
77 JayinKitsap : Not quite true, if it is on the GSA schedule they can by away. However, a pool of GSA contracts personnel drove the manufacturer/distributer mad for
78 DL767captain : The A380 would obviously give a lot of room but i'm just wondering, mostly the AF1 arrives at military bases but on occasion it must visit civilian a
79 JBo : The 747 vs. A380 compatability issue has to do with gates and parking at terminals. Air Force One would be parked on a remote ramp somewhere. The A38
80 Nycbjr : don't forget taxi ways etc, I believe they have to be widened a bit so the outboard engines don't ingest fod, I could be way off base however.. altho
81 Post contains links and images AirRyan : http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...residential%20Aircraft%20by%202017 Looking for three aircraft with the first to be delivered by 2017, then 2019
82 Keesje : I think the AF1 is accompanied by a C5 often and an A380 needs less runways & climbs faster. No sure if the airport factor is that simple.. Apart from
83 Columba : In fact it is too silent, so that is a secury risk - people on board could hear conversations they are not supposed to hear
84 Post contains links MCIGuy : To carry the Presidential limo and the motorcade. This is a job that I'm sure a C-17 (or two) could handle if needed. Don't miss On Board Air Force O
85 Moose135 : At various times, I've seen both C-5s and C-17s accompany a POTUS visit to New York (JFK)
86 TropicBird : I did not see it mentioned here but this is not an RFP (Request for Proposals) but an RFI (Request for Information) from prospective bidders for the n
87 MCIGuy : I think the question is moot since it looks like there's only going to be one bidder.
88 AirRyan : They can't wait too long, given that Boeing may not have a 748i to offer in a few years and numerous articles say that the USAF wants the first plane
89 PhilSquares : Care to provide a source for that outlandish statement????
90 Keesje : I think congress has learned how it works and is already lobbying to get the right people behind requirements and specification that stear the deal to
91 AirRyan : What are you talking about? It's no secret that if they don't sell enough 748's they won't be able to justify keeping the line open just so they can
92 Gsosbee : Huh?? If Boeing cannot justify keeping the 74 line open, then Airbus should be shuttering the A380 line at any moment. The cost of developing an exis
93 Keesje : Now, if that was only truth Hundreds of millions had to be invested in 2006 and 2008, over-stretched engineering resources, supply chain problems and
94 Gsosbee : Hundreds of millions to a company whose revenues are annually in excess of $50 Billion is a drop in the bucket. Using your analysis, the A380 would h
95 DL767captain : What are you talking about? There is such a little difference between the 748i and 748f that the order from LH alone can justify keeping the 748i. 20
96 ZANL188 : Please show it to us then. I only worked with the aircraft and crew... what would I know.... Give our regards to Danny B.
97 PDXCessna206 : I love all the arguing that goes on over such a prestigious and beautiful symbol of America. It's going to be the 748. ;]
98 Nomadd22 : The i and F fuselages aren't the same. The length is the same, but they're stretched at different points. If Lufthansa takes their last i and no more
99 PhilSquares : Not him! It's Don J.
100 ZANL188 : Sorry - I thought you meant somebody else.... Name doesn't click though... Right seater or backup left seater?
101 PhilSquares : Left Seater. He had flown the 137 under Reagan and then picked up the 747 when it was delivered.
102 Keesje : I guess an A380 (-900?) would be a GE / GP powered aircraft delivered empty to a completion centre in Wichita or elsewhere. But maybe a 747 is good en
103 MCIGuy : I watched a show last night on HD Theater, I think it was called Luxury Planes. They went to W-P AFB and toured VC-137 26000. I didn't know until then
104 ZANL188 : After the VC-25s came online 26000 & 27000 went to the regular 89AW Blue & White fleet doing congressional junkets, backup duty for AF1, etc. I spent
105 JBo : The A380 could easily taxi on two engines ... the A380 could also easily taxi on a 75-foot wide taxiway just like the 747 or the C-5. The A380 is not
106 Lexy : The VC-25 fly's domestically as well. The VC-32A's are used on smaller airstrips and on smaller "trips" for POTUS. In my humble opinion, the 748-i is
107 Max Q : I think some Classic's went up to 833000 pounds MGTOW Phil, I know Cx's did.
108 Post contains images Keesje : The Japanese also have 2 747 for their head of state, and some others too. Maybe by 2017 the EC has concluded they can't do without A380's for POTEC t
109 Stitch : Just out of curiosity, how much "state business" does the President of the EU do?
110 SEPilot : Marine 1 doesn't receive anywhere near the publicity that AF1 does, and there have been congresscritters bent out of shape by the fact that it went t
111 Bennett123 : You assume that the engines are "independent" surely all the fuels comes from the same tanks for example.
112 SpeedyGonzales : It's not exactly, but close enough for small failure rates. If the probability of one engine failing is Pf, the probability of at least one of n engi
113 SEPilot : We are talking about independent failures, which would be not caused by such things as running out of fuel, flying into a volcanic cloud or flock of
114 Ken777 : After watching National Geographics' show on the current planes I believe they have a lot of years to fly. Plenty of time to watch the new 4 holers in
115 Bennett123 : SEPilot Under your rather restrictive definition of engine failure you are doubtless correct. Assuming that there is not a defective batch of the comp
116 SEPilot : The point is that the argument for more than two engines is based on the chances of two UNRELATED engine failures on the same flight. Related failure
117 Bennett123 : I would largely agree with you over ETOPS, although not all twins are certified under ETOPS. Concerning safety, presumably loss of an engine is more o
118 SEPilot : This is all true, and has been taken into account in the design of twins. The predominance of twins has led to comments about hairdryers used to powe
119 Post contains links Sm92 : Looks like the A380 is not going to be an option for becoming Air Force One: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...for-air-force-one-replacement.html
120 Bennett123 : Why invest money in an essentially "phoney" contest.
121 Moose135 : A little thing call the law. The are required to open the program up to bidders and evaluate any appropriate alternatives.
122 Stitch : Considering the amount of work they would need to perform in the United States, this is a perfectly reasonable response from them. It's not like they
123 Andz : So what would happen to the current aircraft?
124 Stitch : They will likely be used as back-ups, just as the 707's were to the VC-25s for a time.
125 Bennett123 : Moose135 To clarify my previous statement; Why should Airbus invest money in quoting for a contract that they will not be allowed to win. The US will
126 Moose135 : Got ya, Bennett, obviously my answer was to why they would have a competition, not why should Airbus participate.
127 Bennett123 : I understood that it can be bypassed by Congress.
128 Alien : Better yet, why waste money on what is in effect a three unit production run. It's not phoney, but then again I find it pretty It has nothing to do w
129 Keesje : I doubt so. Airbus would have delivered three green empty airframes to a US completion center somewhere. They probably decided they have better thing
130 SEPilot : When someone says that "politics played no role, it's all about production" I tend to believe it's about politics. Airbus has had to buck enough poli
131 Bennett123 : Alien Yes I do mean "allowed". Even if the A380 was offered free of charge, it is politically a non starter. It is hard to envisage any AF1 not made b
132 Post contains links DEVILFISH : This Defense-Aerospace breaking news from AFP suggests those might soldier on for a while longer..... Boeing set to refit Air Force One after EADS wi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 2009 RFP For New Air Force One
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Replacement For German Air Force One posted Sat Apr 21 2007 23:19:21 by LXA340
The New Air Force One posted Mon Feb 20 2006 03:20:30 by Alaska737
US President Selects A380 As New Air Force One... posted Tue May 3 2005 22:56:35 by AirOrange
Canadian "Air Force One" Getting New Paint posted Tue Dec 18 2007 14:42:36 by YOWza
First New IAF "Air Force One" posted Thu Nov 30 2006 23:26:51 by DEVILFISH
New U.S. Air Force Bombers Planned For 2018, 2035 posted Fri Oct 13 2006 06:48:45 by AerospaceFan
New Life For Portuguese Air Force SA330 Puma posted Fri Aug 12 2005 15:23:51 by CV990
3rd A319CJ For Italian Air Force In New C/s posted Tue Jul 15 2003 08:38:47 by Alpha
Security Measures For Air Force One posted Thu Mar 20 2003 14:58:07 by Ryanb741
Behind The Scenes On Air Force One posted Mon Nov 24 2008 18:05:49 by Wannabe

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format