Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Did The Usaf Pick The 742 Over The 743?  
User currently offlineoverloaduk From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2009, 69 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5406 times:

Well the question is in the title Why Did The USAF Pick The 742 Over The 743?

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12146 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5406 times:

A B-747-300 configuered the same as the VC-25As would have been heavier, reducing the unrefueled range slightly and there was no need for the SUD.

User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2930 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 5260 times:

Or... There was no 743 when the E-4s were ordered.


The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3550 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5181 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

although the VC-25 was ordered under Reagan's watch, the design work began earlier. At that time the -300 was just entering flight test. one of the requirements was the the airframe and engines had a proven reliability. Yes they could have added the SUD (stretched upper deck) however they didn't. since the wing tools were already being modified for the 747-300 and the was little difference they were used.

User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8538 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5177 times:

We will see if the new 748 based AF1 will be a freighter model or the I model. Most likely an I model. They will find a use for the space.

User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4974 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
We will see if the new 748 based AF1 will be a freighter model or the I model. Most likely an I model. They will find a use for the space.

When you're customizing an aircraft to that level, does it really count as either?



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12146 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4953 times:

Quoting kanban (Reply 3):
one of the requirements was the the airframe and engines had a proven reliability.

You do understand the VC-25A is really a hybrid airplane don't you? It incorproates parts of the B-747-200B, B-747-300, and B-747-400 designs, as well as unique features (like left side cargo doors with airstairs, duel APUs, etc.). There are no other B-747s anywhere in the world like then, not even the USAF E-4Bs. The GE CF-6-80 engines are from the B-747-400, which did not fly on any other airplanes at the time, and the B-747-400 had an EIS just a year before the VC-25s did (although the VC-25As actually flew before the -400 did).


User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3550 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4852 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 6):
You do understand the VC-25A is really a hybrid airplane don't you? It incorproates parts of the B-747-200B, B-747-300, and B-747-400 designs,

Yes I understand that, however I also was involved in the building and production of these a/c and there were constraints on anything that was "new" and not sufficiently tested. The Air Force and Secret Service were very cautious. he engines were well tested. They did not want an engine failure or a sudden decompression because a new door or hinge point was weak. Still they birds are becoming more and more difficult to maintain and upgrade in terms of both parts and cost.

Let's leave it at that and welcome the effort to design and build replacements.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12146 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4457 times:

Quoting kanban (Reply 7):
Let's leave it at that and welcome the effort to design and build replacements.

good point


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8538 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4246 times:

Quoting N328KF (Reply 5):
When you're customizing an aircraft to that level, does it really count as either?

Good point. It depends on the level of EMP protection I would guess. If not for that, it could be a standard 748I with antennae on the roof, and maybe some environmental work on the cargo deck.

The crazy thing about "heavy customization" is that it's expensive to develop, spare parts do not exist for custom parts except from the original run, and besides, the "proven airframe" standard loses its meaning as well.

As a lay person, it looks like the 757 C-32 project was cheap and done right. A standard few 748-I with some EMP protection would be great. Lastly, although the VC-25 is a separate type, everybody calls it "the president's 747". It is, obviously, some kind of 747. Which kind... philosophical question.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Why Did The Usaf Pick The 742 Over The 743?
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...
Why Did The IAF Choose The F-15? posted Tue Jun 24 2008 19:10:39 by Blackbird
Why Did The Sikorsky S-72 "X-Wing" Fail? posted Tue Jul 3 2007 18:14:17 by N231YE
Why Did RB-57F Need The Extra J 60 Turbojets? posted Sat Sep 23 2006 23:20:31 by 747400sp
Why The Usaf Cancel The YC-14 & YC-15 posted Tue Feb 21 2006 00:19:19 by 747400sp
The X-33: Why Did It Fail? posted Tue Aug 16 2005 05:26:48 by Citation X
Why Did The French Navy Operate The F-8 posted Sat Mar 19 2005 18:58:58 by RampRat74
Why Did Canada Choose The F-18? posted Tue Feb 17 2004 10:35:53 by Vio
When Is The Hearing For The Usaf Tanker Deal posted Wed May 28 2008 15:59:18 by Dougbr2006
What If The Usaf Needed A Smaller Tanker? KC-767? posted Mon Mar 31 2008 14:36:41 by Jackonicko
Is The KC-30 To Slow For The Usaf? posted Thu Oct 11 2007 06:31:59 by KC135TopBoom

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format