M11Stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1190 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6319 times:
I doubt it will be replaced for a while. A 777-300ER seems likely IMO because of its similar size to the 742 and it has great range. The whole 747-8 program is sketchy at this point.
My views, opinions and statements are my own and do not have any association with those of my current or former employer
Adipasqu From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 235 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6242 times:
The $64 million question is: will the next AF1 be a 2 or 4 holler???
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9177 posts, RR: 15 Reply 3, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6241 times:
Will this 'new' Air Force One thread ever die.....?????
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
Lufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 2843 posts, RR: 11 Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6227 times:
Given the world financial mess at the moment, and that the 742's currently used are in top notch condition, is a new AF1 really needed at the moment?
Sure it will eventually need to be replaced. But I dont think anybody in Washington should even dare talk about it it in the current financial climate. Especially after mr Obama has decided to go and chase Wall Street for their excesses. Not a good look politically.
That being said the answer is simple. Whatever is boeing's largest product on offer at the time, unless we start seeing another large airframe locally manufacturered in the USA. Highly unlikely but not impossible if you saw some kind of Airbus-Lockheed joint venture. In the current environment i wouldn't bet on it but if things get messy enough all of these companies as we know them may look very different in 10 years time.
1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 5065 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6227 times:
I would say the 777-200LR, due to its extensive range.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
Adipasqu From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 235 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6206 times:
Nitepilot79 From Turkey, joined May 2008, 208 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6051 times:
Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3): Will this 'new' Air Force One thread ever die.....?????
Sorry bro, didn't mean to cramp your style, the question remains valid though, as that 747 is OLD, those 757s have to be aging by now too. An airframe can only handle so much. Should we build a replica of the 1st 742? Or how about a rebuilt Concorde? Perhaps a bit much, but a bitchin, idea
Daleaholic From UK - England, joined Oct 2005, 3154 posts, RR: 18 Reply 13, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6048 times:
I think the USAF would always choose a 4 engined aircraft for the primary Air Force One aircraft, purely based on the safety of having more than one engine left if one fails...
That's my opinion anyway. But like stated above, AF1 is in near perfect condition. It's unlikely that the aircraft will need replacing anytime soon.
Religion is an illusion of childhood... Outgrown under proper education.
Adipasqu From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 235 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6032 times:
Quoting Nitepilot79 (Reply 12): that 747 is OLD, those 757s have to be aging by now too
Very low cycles + best maintenance money can buy = those birds will still be flying government VIP's well beyond 2020.
0NEWAIR0 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 762 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6009 times:
747-8i to replace 747-200s
787 and 737 Replacement to replace 757/737s
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
0NEWAIR0 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 762 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5972 times:
Quoting Daleaholic (Reply 13): That's my opinion anyway. But like stated above, AF1 is in near perfect condition. It's unlikely that the aircraft will need replacing anytime soon.
I believe Obama is actually the one that will pick the replacement that will come out in 2017. It doesn't matter if it's "in near perfect condition" ...it's getting replaced.
Quoting Alessandro (Reply 6): Check out "Military&Space" forum. My answer none, US can´t afford it.
Call the US Government and thell them that they can't afford it. I'm sure you'll be met with a a laugh and a hang up.
[Edited 2009-03-23 19:07:35]
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2896 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5970 times:
Quoting Nitepilot79 (Reply 12): Sorry bro, didn't mean to cramp your style, the question remains valid though, as that 747 is OLD, those 757s have to be aging by now too.
An aircraft's useful life isn't determined by age - moreso by cycles and number of hours in the air - both of which the VC25s are very low on. Theoretically, these birds could last forever at the current rate they're being utilized.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 20630 posts, RR: 62 Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5883 times:
There is already a request out for concepts, and Airbus just declined to bid.
The 748 is the obvious choice.
An alternative is to retrofit the current aircraft.
As for Obama not ordering them? He has no problem spending money on government things. He's spent large sums redecorating the West Wing. All he'll say is that these create jobs for Americans and are necessary, and people will say fine.
Quoting 777STL (Reply 17): An aircraft's useful life isn't determined by age - moreso by cycles and number of hours in the air - both of which the VC25s are very low on. Theoretically, these birds could last forever at the current rate they're being utilized.
Most people say this without doing the research.
I did the research.
The VC-25s are getting old by AF1 standards, and will ultimately be the oldest primary AF1s in the history of the designation by the time they are replaced even if the planes are ordered tomorrow, as they wouldn't be in service before 2014.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5222 posts, RR: 6 Reply 19, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5868 times:
Quoting M11Stephen (Reply 1): I doubt it will be replaced for a while.
Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 5): Given the world financial mess at the moment, and that the 742's currently used are in top notch condition, is a new AF1 really needed at the moment?
Quoting Heathrow (Reply 9): Not now, but in the future, it will need to be replaced.
All of you apparent don't remember or don't realize that the US Government is already soliciting Boeing and Airbus for a RFP for a replacement of the VC-25A. Airbus has already stated that they will not participate in the RFP.
Lufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 2843 posts, RR: 11 Reply 20, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5847 times:
Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 16): Call the US Government and thell them that they can't afford it. I'm sure you'll be met with a a laugh and a hang up.
Oh they can afford it all right. It's a question of priorieties. Is a new imperial barge needed at the moment for the head of state when he is telling everybody to pull in the belt, stick to gether and well, that money could simply be put to more productive use in a difficult time. Perception is everything in politics. Sometimes to the rediculous. See the situation with the UK and its complete lack of anything suitable for the PM. At least during the thatcher days you could use the VC-10, and even though there's still a few of them about its far past its used by date, and a joke when you consider that heads of state in northern african republics are ordering A345s. (once again probably too excessive... opposite end of the spectrum).
Given this, I think the US has the right balance at the moment. Something that can do the job well for the moment, and they can wait until things are in a bit of a happier general mood before they order a replacement. If they want to do anything they can always do some interior rennovations.
A380US From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2357 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5751 times:
Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3): Will this 'new' Air Force One thread ever die.....?????
It will go with NW DC-9's
O wait no more NW lol
Back on topic,
I think the 777-300ER
the 200 is too small and the LR is not necessary considering the aircrafts in air fueling capabilities.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 20630 posts, RR: 62 Reply 22, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5714 times:
Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 20): Is a new imperial barge needed at the moment for the head of state when he is telling everybody to pull in the belt, stick to gether and well, that money could simply be put to more productive use in a difficult time.
Two 748s would not be paid for in 2009, but in 3 years for the frames, and then over the next 2 years for the modifications.
If Obama says "things not going to get better so we can't afford to buy planes 3-5 years from now" his words will help to prolong the recession, not help end it.
Not to mention that in the grand scheme of the $3T budget and such, $800M spread out over 3-4 years starting 3 years from now is a penny in the bottomless well. That's at most $400M in any one year period, or 0.01% of the budget. On something that creates jobs in America...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Rwy04LGA From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1351 posts, RR: 4 Reply 23, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5704 times:
Ask a mechanic about the Boeing-made, Air Force-maintained B-52.
Quoting 777STL (Reply 17): An aircraft's useful life isn't determined by age - more so by cycles and number of hours in the air - both of which the VC25s are very low on. Theoretically, these birds could last forever at the current rate they're being utilized.
Ask a mechanic about the Boeing-made, Air Force-maintained VC-25.
Neither of these birds are anywhere NEAR retirement.
Boeing has the most experience in making large aircraft, while the USAF has the best aircraft maintenance.
The early bird gets the worm, BUT...the second mouse gets the cheese!
0NEWAIR0 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 762 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5694 times:
Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 20): Given this, I think the US has the right balance at the moment. Something that can do the job well for the moment, and they can wait until things are in a bit of a happier general mood before they order a replacement. If they want to do anything they can always do some interior rennovations.
You're point is taken; however, whether made public or not during the global recession I bet you that the Obama administration will select the replacements for all presidential aircraft in this term. The planes wont be delivered until 2017 but I'll bet almost anything that Obama will be the one making the selection.
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
Lufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 2843 posts, RR: 11 Reply 26, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5626 times:
Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 24): You're point is taken; however, whether made public or not during the global recession I bet you that the Obama administration will select the replacements for all presidential aircraft in this term. The planes wont be delivered until 2017 but I'll bet almost anything that Obama will be the one making the selection.
Very good point. Of course it could be ordered and it kept somewhat quiet until a later more popular date, under some 'defence' project that doesnt have to be made completely public.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 22): f Obama says "things not going to get better so we can't afford to buy planes 3-5 years from now" his words will help to prolong the recession, not help end it.
Very good point. And I think he's not going to say something to discourage anybody. But he can't say 'No more wall street fat cats" and then look like one himself. Still the solution is obvious. Quietly select the aircraft, reserve the production line slots and then wait for a few years to make the order official, by which time memories of Citigroup being forced to scrap falcon jets and chasing after wall street fat cat's bonus payouts will be long forgotton.
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9177 posts, RR: 15 Reply 28, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5436 times:
Quoting Nitepilot79 (Reply 12):
Sorry bro, didn't mean to cramp your style, the question remains valid though,
Not when the same subject gets asked 50 times a year. A quick search will find endless threads on this subject.... and those are just the ones the moderators did not delete
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9177 posts, RR: 15 Reply 29, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5408 times:
Quoting Nitepilot79 (Reply 12): as that 747 is OLD, those 757s have to be aging by now too. An airframe can only handle so much
......oh and age has nothing to do with it. Only one thing kills an aircraft...cycles...and since the VC-25 is one of the lowest time/cycle 747 in the world it's a safe bet it is not going anywhere for a long time.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
Kingairta From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 338 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 5289 times:
People forget were talking about the Govt here as well.
While the current VC-25 may be in good condition now you have to look to the future. If everything was put on hold when the plane is in need of replacement it'll be years and years before it is ever replaced. And in the long run that could leave the 89th not having the plane/s they need.
Ex52tech From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 559 posts, RR: 2 Reply 31, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5094 times:
Quoting EMBQA (Reply 29): oh and age has nothing to do with it. Only one thing kills an aircraft...cycles...and since the VC-25 is one of the lowest time/cycle 747 in the world it's a safe bet it is not going anywhere for a long time.
Exactly!!!
I can not believe that they are talking about replacing the current VC-25s. I would not like to see the next AF ONE to be a two engine airplane, there is a certain amount of safety that you just can not get with two engines.
[Edited 2009-03-24 14:17:32]
"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 6712 posts, RR: 3 Reply 32, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5075 times:
Quoting Kingairta (Reply 30): And in the long run that could leave the 89th not having the plane/s they need.
I think definitely given some commercial aircraft have gone past 30 years of active service (think NWA 742s, still active IIRC, 100k+ hours), 30 years of NW service is roughly 90 years in AF1 service. Let's compromise at 60. Then, VC-25 should be pretty solid until the year 2050.
The problem is far more likely manufacturer support. The 742 is on its way out of commercial service. Its final decade is upon us. The USAF might find difficulties maintaining an orphan fleet of a type nobody flies anymore (think Lockheed Tristar). So that's the one reason I can see an early sunset for the VC-25. Shoulda been 744...
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5042 times:
Quoting M11Stephen (Reply 1): The whole 747-8 program is sketchy at this point.
I have no idea where you get this idea, the 748i program doesn't have a ton of orders but the 748f has plenty of orders and has already started assembly the program is fine.
There are really only three options for the next AF1, 777, 787, 748. It will not be an Airbus aircraft, people flipped out when Marine One wasn't going to be a US made helicopter.
777: They really have two options, 777-200LR or the 777-300ER. Both would be excellent, if they wanted to downsize the 777-200LR would give them incredible range with the light load they usually take, they would rarely need inflight refueling. But the 777-300ER keeps them at about the same size as the current AF1 and I doubt they are looking at downsizing. Problem is the 777 is still only a two engined plane, sure it can fly on one engine for a while but would they really take the chance with the president when they could easily have a 4 holer?
787: I think the 787 will be too small for AF1. you would have to get the 787-10 just to get to the size of a 777 so there is no real point. Yes the plane would be very efficient but it's just too small. Now the 787 would make an interesting replacement for the 757s, or even in addition to the 757s.
748: This is probably going to be the next AF1 (and with multiple VIP orders, enough to replace both AF1s and E-4Bs, it could have already been ordered). It gives them some more growth over the existing AF1 and remains a 4 holer. I just don't see them being alright having the possibility of one engine failing on a 777 and having to land for a replacement when on a 747 they would need two to fail before that was truly required.
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 755 posts, RR: 54 Reply 35, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5030 times:
The Executive Branch would lobby for the 747-8I for no other reason than because that's what the public "expects" when they see Air Force One. To the vast majority of the public, Americans and abroad, Air Force One isn't a call-sign, it's those two 747s painted in blue and white.
Roll-up in a 777 or 787 and the public is going to feel snubbed.
HercPPMX From United States of America, joined May 2008, 192 posts, RR: 0 Reply 36, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4980 times:
Quoting Flighty (Reply 32): The problem is far more likely manufacturer support. The 742 is on its way out of commercial service. Its final decade is upon us. The USAF might find difficulties maintaining an orphan fleet of a type nobody flies anymore (think Lockheed Tristar). So that's the one reason I can see an early sunset for the VC-25. Shoulda been 744...
Support could indeed become a problem, I'm am fairly confident that the USAF realizes this and would probably easily justify the creation of a stock-pile of parts for the aircraft vs. procurement of a new fleet of more modern aircrafts. Who knows there maybe one already, I remember on a TV show a few months ago on National Geographic channel that they said most planes wait until something brakes to replace them, The VC-25 has it's parts replaced at the first sign of wear.
Also I don't think any manufacture would really turn it's back on an Aircraft that not only represents the POTUS but also the United States itself. Just my $0.02
Ex52tech From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 559 posts, RR: 2 Reply 37, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4778 times:
Just park some 742s and 744s in the bone yard, and you have a supply of parts for the VC-25s.
For the specialized parts that are common only to the VC-25, well turn some of them out that you think you will need to maintain the fleet.
"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2053 posts, RR: 6 Reply 38, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4769 times:
Here's a good idea of what the 777-300ER would look like at any rate...
Par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 7 Reply 39, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4719 times:
The B-748 seems to have been a better made pic, the B-777 has too many windows, they appear to be unmodified from the pax version.
Reduce the windows on the B-777 pic and we can have a real comparison of beauty.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17845 posts, RR: 59 Reply 40, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4655 times:
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 7): I would say the 777-200LR, due to its extensive range.
Aerial refueling capability kind of cancels that out.
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 41, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4349 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 40): Aerial refueling capability kind of cancels that out.
It would probably be nice if they could fly longer without having to refuel though, lets say there are 80 people onboard the 772LR could fly forever!
Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 38): Here's a good idea of what the 777-300ER would look like at any rate...
Looks pretty bad to me, it reminds me of the 707 a little
N829th From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 20 posts, RR: 0 Reply 42, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4309 times:
Even though the 777 would function as a great AF1, half of the reason they fly the 742 right now is because of the reputation and the look of that monster aircraft rolling onto your ramp. The AF1 pilot that flew Bush around works for a flight department now next to me and we're had a few chances to talk and have him tell me a few stories. He told me that flying the 742 was way overkill most of the time for a lot of the missions they went on. But it was important to carry that reputation along with them wherever they flew. For that reason alone i say they will use the 748. However, I like the idea of replacing the 737 and 757 with the 787.
Dtw9 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 891 posts, RR: 2 Reply 44, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4249 times:
In this age of cutbacks, and with the number of people out of work,I think the appropriate next generation Air force One should look like this.
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 45, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4058 times:
Quoting N829th (Reply 42): He told me that flying the 742 was way overkill most of the time for a lot of the missions they went on. But it was important to carry that reputation along with them wherever they flew. For that reason alone i say they will use the 748. However, I like the idea of replacing the 737 and 757 with the 787.
Like when he came to long beach the other week? It was complete overkill but it still looked pretty cool having that large of a plane sitting there ready to go at a moments notice, if Obama pulled up in a 737 he would just be laughed at.
Par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 7 Reply 46, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4041 times:
Quoting N829th (Reply 42): The AF1 pilot that flew Bush around works for a flight department now next to me and we're had a few chances to talk and have him tell me a few stories. He told me that flying the 742 was way overkill most of the time for a lot of the missions they went on. But it was important to carry that reputation along with them wherever they flew
It's somewhat puzzling that some one who actually flew the a/c seemed to think that it was only for transportation from point A to point B.
Sponsor Message: 
From Turkey, joined May 2008, 208 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1190 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 910 posts, 
From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 2843 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2007, 726 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Oct 2005, 3154 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Oct 2008, 242 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 651 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5100 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4102 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
