Bureaucromancer From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 164 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5728 times:
Actually, I don't believe that it was. As for AF1, the passenger loading may be light, but my understanding is the equipment they carry, particularly in terms of command and control facilities, is quite heavy all in all. Also bear in mind that light passenger load doesn't include the fact they've got a fairly big crew as well (ok, doesn't change much against an all economy passenger config, but you've got more onboard than just pax).
NorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1759 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5659 times:
Doesn't AF1 have air to air refueling capability? Allowing it to operate to anywhere in the world nonstop, not to mention allowing it to stay airborne indefinitely?
As for customs, why would the president need to go through customs? I'd think that one of the benefits of being president or one of his chosen staff members is being able to avoid those formalities when flying on AF1. That being said, i wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of arrivals facility at Andrews for the "commoners" traveling with the president, i.e. the press corps, but I certainly wouldn't think the president is subject to that, he just jumps in his limo and heads straight home.
Just my 2 cents.
Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
Bureaucromancer From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 164 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5622 times:
No idea about customs procedures, but I suspect that someone does run the president, along with everyone else through as a formality. If not it raises some interesting constitutional issues, as well as some straight up legal ones around actual customs declarations (rather than immigration controls).
As for air to air refueling, yes it does have that capability, which is cheaper, easier and safer, air to air or a stopover? Air to air is reasonably routine, but do you really want to be using it with the president on board for no reason other than to save a stop?
hiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2133 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5533 times:
From the anchorage papers he did a veterans day celebration on the military base. Westbound during winter is always tough with the winds and arriving over Japan with minimum fuel is not SOP for the MAC wing I would think. Perhaps the press charter needed it as well as a thought. Yes the bird is capable of inflight refueling but I am not sure, despite all the practice, that it has been done with the boss onboard.
As far as customs...i believe they carry 1 or 2 agents with them on intl flights and it is 'done' enroute for the peons.
413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5533 times:
Air to air refueling is too dangerous to do it on a routine mission with the President on board. I don't believe it has ever been done. AF1 landed at various air bases on 9/11 and didn't refuel in midair.
I think they still need to go through customs because of all the civilians on board.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 28623 posts, RR: 84 Reply 8, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5503 times:
I believe they only added air-to-air refueling in case of a nuclear exchange where it would be unsafe for the plane to land at an airport (or no field with operable refueling facilities and staff was within range).
saab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1608 posts, RR: 11 Reply 9, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5377 times:
Quoting 413X3 (Reply 7): I think they still need to go through customs because of all the civilians on board.
It's an Air Force flight, not a civilian airline flight. If there is customs for the civilian passengers I am willing to bet it can be handled at Andrews. I doubt very much they do much more than service the airplane and fuel it and leave again.
413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5208 times:
Quoting saab2000 (Reply 9): It's an Air Force flight, not a civilian airline flight. If there is customs for the civilian passengers I am willing to bet it can be handled at Andrews. I doubt very much they do much more than service the airplane and fuel it and leave again.
Don't the "Reach" flights stop for customs when entering airspace? Yes it's a private company flying the plane but still...
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6896 posts, RR: 29 Reply 12, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5185 times:
On practice of the AF1 flights is fuel stops so that the two press planes which accompany the President do not get too far behind. Rather than the range of the AF1 modified B747-200, the question should be what is the range of a heavily loaded B767--400.
Because from another thread, we know that at least one of the press aircraft on the trip was a DAL B764 which was parked at Yokota.
The Great Circle Mapper puts the flight at 5,889 nm - beyond the range of the B767-400 at MTOW according to specs here and on Wikipedia.
Quoting saab2000 (Reply 9): It's an Air Force flight, not a civilian airline flight. If there is customs for the civilian passengers I am willing to bet it can be handled at Andrews.
Andrews does have military customs facilities available. They are frequently used (probably daily or several times daily) for the many military flights arriving from outside the US. I would be shocked if the President does not at least sign a customs declaration form. Just from the potential political mileage the other party could make.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6896 posts, RR: 29 Reply 16, posted (3 years 1 month 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4959 times:
Quoting trex8 (Reply 13): So if a foreign leader gives him a gift during such an overseas trip which is worth more than $800 does he pay the customs duty or does the US taxpayer?
The US Constitution, Article I, Section 9 prohibits anyone in the US government, including the President, from receiving a personal gift from a foreign head of state without the permission of Congress. A gift from a foreign leader is accepted under the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966, and further legislation in 1977.
Almost all gifts to the President are 'given to the American people' and become part of the property of the White House Gift Unit which disposes of gifts in the most fitting manner. Eventually most of them end up in the Presidential Library of the recipient President.
Anything with a value of over the GSA decided minimal value limit (it was raised from $100 to $180 in the Reagan administration) may be retained by the President or First Lady - however they must purchase the gift from the GSA at fair market value.
The President and First Lady may retain gifts of minimal value - less than $180. The combined value of such gifts is considered income and the President and First Lady must pay federal income taxes on that value on their annual return. The fair market value of gifts they purchase from the GSA is also considered income - so they are basically double taxed on those items if they keep them.
The taxable amount includes foreign gifts - along with domestic gifts - which the President/ First Lady and other government employees receive. The President and First Lady receive an amazing amount of gifts daily.
And Yes, the President and First Lady, their staff and other government officials on the aircraft, do pay customs duties on items they purchase and bring into this country.
Cheating on customs duties is too easy to be detected in the very public atmosphere where the President and First Lady live - and too easy for it to be a political weapon used against them.
CitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2319 posts, RR: 3 Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4075 times:
There is an interesting story about why AF-1 has inflight refueling capability. During the bid proposal process, the 747-200 was competing with the DC-10 for AF-1. The DC-10 didn't meet the range requirement and the 747 did. In order to keep the DC-10 in the competition, the Air Force added inflight refueling to the RFP requirements, to keep McD in the competition, even though the 747 could meet the range requirement without IFR. After the 747 won the contract award, Boeing offered to eliminate the IFR capability from their aircraft and refund the cost of the system. The Air Force refused, and that is why IFR exists today on VC-25. I worked at Boeing Military Airplane Co in Wichita KS at the time, and worked on AF-1 in engineering. This story is documented in a book written by Chuck Fisher, the Boeing pilot who flew the B-52 that lost its tail over Colorado and landed in Arkansas. The book is titled "High, Low, Joker and the Game" by Charles Fisher and Steve Conway. http://www2.xlibris.com/bookstore/bookdisplay.aspx?bookid=12315