bj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 10150 times:
I just read a Dutch column about Air Force One and the 787 which got me thinking, what would be a good replacement for Air Force One and when will it be replaced?
I know this has been discussed about six years ago but with some new planes available and the environmental issue being more important these days I thought it might be interesting to take another stab at this subject.
In the column the writer states that the faith in the Boeing 787 is dropping and that the faith could be easily restored if Obama would order one to replace his old and very polluting 747-200 with a 787.
Not only would Obama help restore faith in the Boeing 787 (with hundreds of orders I personally doubt they need it) but he would also have a new state of the art airplane that is much less polluting.
Personally I doubt that the 787 would be a possible replacement. Downsizing from a 747 to a 787 would probably be an American no no. Bigger is always better, smaller not so much. (besides his entourage isn't exactly small)
Upgrading to the A380 would be a political no no, I mean come on the thing is French!! (European I know, but doubt most non aviation people know that, my American friends don't) Then again bigger is supposedly better.
With the economy in the gutter he might go for the cheap option and buy an Il 96 like the one the Russian government uses. (unrealistic, but a fun thought seeing an Il 96 in Air Force One colors.)
But how about a 777-300? It's big, American, more economical than the old plane and has a good service history, ignoring the "minor" crashes due to engine issues.
My guess is that when it's time to send the two current Air Force Ones to the big runway in the sky they will be replaced with a shiny new 747-8i Why, it's bigger than the current 747, it's American, more economical and a has short waiting list.
I do wonder how long they are going to keep the current Air Force Ones. I am guessing getting hold of parts is going to become an issue in the next ten years. Especially considering their maintenance regime.
columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6835 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 10097 times:
The 787 could replace the 757s currently being used but not for the time being. The 757s are quite new. I doubt that the new AF1 will be a 787. It is too small in comparison with other goverment aircraft.
I believe the next AF 1 will be the 747-8I.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Burkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4268 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 10056 times:
This has been frequently discussed in the military section.
My personal shoer summary:
a) There is no need in a new plane, the current ones are not so heavily used that they cannot be used another decade at least.
b) While we know that twins are very safe aircraft, still with a single engine out an aircraft has to land at the next suitable location. A good fraction of the world, starting with Russia and China, the US president would not want to be forced to land with a simple engine out, so the next aircraft will be quad.
c) If one aircraft suits perfect, it is the B747-800i.
The 787 might be good, if such political aid is needed, to replace the 757 used currently for Pelosi, Hillary and Michelle. Will any of them still be in service when it can be dlivered - if you really want to get airlines angry, then push them up the queue and place the US president before their nose...
bj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 10019 times:
Quoting Burkhard (Reply 2): if you really want to get airlines angry, then push them up the queue and place the US president before their nose...
I am sure they will be able to find a patriotic airline willing to give them a slot. But foreign customers might indeed get agitated. That said it would be a nice replacement plane for the 757.
I just thought of something else though. They might have to change the livery a bit because polished plastic doesn't look as nice as polished metal.
Drfix2fly From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 27 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 10002 times:
If I where to bet I wold say there is more chance of it beeing the 747-800 . I have seen it stated that for the head of state they perfer the redundancy of a four engine aircraft. and while both Airbus and Boeing are global companys with parts and major assymblys built around the world. it comes down to where the headquartes are and PERCEPTION
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9970 times:
Quoting Burkhard (Reply 2): a) There is no need in a new plane, the current ones are not so heavily used that they cannot be used another decade at least.
That's true in theory. But new parts support is becoming more difficult for the 747 classics and that's something to consider as well. I agree with your other points.
Quoting bj87 (Thread starter): Upgrading to the A380 would be a political no no
Probably
Quoting bj87 (Thread starter): I mean come on the thing is French!! (European I know, but doubt most non aviation people know that, my American friends don't)
I think that's kind of a stretch and don't understand why you feel the need to bash Americans, but the key is that the A380 is "not American."
Quoting bj87 (Thread starter): Obama would order one to replace his old and very polluting 747-200
The two VC-25's are neither "very old" nor "very polluting." They were some of (if not "the") last 747 classics off the line before the -400 debuted, around 20 years ago. They are also equipped with the modern GE CF6-80C2 engines available on the 747-400 and 767.
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7411 posts, RR: 7 Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9935 times:
There is no WAY Air Force ONE is going to have 2 engines, as great an airpane the 777-300ER is. The 748 will be the next AF1.
bj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9850 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 5): don't understand why you feel the need to bash Americans, but the key is that the A380 is "not American."
Not trying to bash. But over the last couple of years living in the US I got the idea people don't like the French very much and perception is very important when it comes to Air Force One. Therefore some people thinking it is French might be a problem. I will rephrase next time.
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 5): They are also equipped with the modern GE CF6-80C2 engines available on the 747-400 and 767.
I didn't know that, I guess that would make the pollution difference between the current plane and new ones less of an argument. Then again the new 747 is quite a bit more efficient than the 747-400 so that could be a good selling point with fuel prices being what they are.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6189 posts, RR: 25 Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9801 times:
The US Air Force issued a Request for Proposal in Jan 2009 for the replacement aircraft for the VC-25 to enter service in 2017. Two additional aircraft are to enter the inventory in 2019 and 2021.
Currently Boeing is the only company interested in bidding. EADS North America has publicly announced that they are not interested in placing a bid based on the A380 or other Airbus aircraft.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6302 posts, RR: 39 Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9799 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 5): Quoting Burkhard (Reply 2):
a) There is no need in a new plane, the current ones are not so heavily used that they cannot be used another decade at least.
That's true in theory. But new parts support is becoming more difficult for the 747 classics and that's something to consider as well.
This is the argument the AF uses. I think they just want shiny new toys. The AF has officially issued a request for 3 new planes, and Airbus has declined to even bid. That leaves it to Boeing, and I think that the RFP pretty much dictates that it will be the 748i. But I think that the billion or so that would go for the 3 new planes will pay for an awful lot of fuel and maintenance for the existing birds. But hey, the AF wants new ones.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
CharlieNoble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9759 times:
Quoting bj87 (Reply 7): Not trying to bash. But over the last couple of years living in the US I got the idea people don't like the French very much
Unfortunately, I think a lot of people accept stereotypes instead of thinking for themselves. I remember hearing all the time how 'rude' French Canadians were...must be true, right? When I finally had an opportunity to visit Quebec I discovered how completely wrong that was. They treated us like kings up there. I imagine the same must apply to France though I have never been there. You get what you give, generally.
As for Air Force One, I agree with the 748i. I think Airbus is out not because of nationalism as much as because the American President MUST be seen as supporting American industry. It's ultimately all about the economy...buying a "foreign" plane would be bad public relations.
Given how difficult it has been to buy a simple aeriel tanker replacement, it will probably take a long time to procure replacements for the Air Force Ones.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6302 posts, RR: 39 Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 9688 times:
Quoting CharlieNoble (Reply 10): As for Air Force One, I agree with the 748i. I think Airbus is out not because of nationalism as much as because the American President MUST be seen as supporting American industry. It's ultimately all about the economy...buying a "foreign" plane would be bad public relations.
Given how difficult it has been to buy a simple aeriel tanker replacement, it will probably take a long time to procure replacements for the Air Force Ones.
Since Airbus has declined to bid, the question is academic. It is also a given that the replacement will be the 748. The only question is when, and that is merely depending on when Congress funds it. If logic ruled, it would be another 20 years or so, but since when did Congress pay any attention to logic?
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
bj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 9453 times:
Quoting CharlieNoble (Reply 10): Given how difficult it has been to buy a simple aeriel tanker replacement, it will probably take a long time to procure replacements for the Air Force Ones.
That reminds me where do they stand on the whole helicopter thing. I remember them canceling the order for the Marine One replacement because the project became too expensive. Have they found something else yet?
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11738 posts, RR: 51 Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9284 times:
Quoting bj87 (Reply 12): Have they found something else yet?
A new RFP is being developed, several OEMs are teaming up for the new Marine-1.
The VC-25s will begin being replaced in 2017, as has been said. They will then down grade the VC-25As to C-25As and keep them for a while, much like the USAF did with the VC-137Cs, which hung around for close to 10 years after the first VC-25 was delivered.
As it looks today, the new AF-1 will be the B-747-8i. If EADS ever decides to compete the A-380, it won't be with RR engines.
HKA098 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 556 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9267 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13): As it looks today, the new AF-1 will be the B-747-8i. If EADS ever decides to compete the A-380, it won't be with RR engines.
I just saw a program about AF1 on the History Channel. The ground crew hand polishes that aircraft with chamois. I for one would not want to hand polish an A380.
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2262 posts, RR: 5 Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8951 times:
These threads are about as numerous as the NWA DC-9 replacement threads but I for one am a fan of them.
I agree with others stating that the next POTUS tranport will be the 747-8i.
Thinking out loud here, but I personally think a good C-32 replacement would be a C-"762". More range, more "elbow room" and still get into a lot of airfields. Again, just thinking out loud.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3258 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8927 times:
Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 15): but I personally think a good C-32 replacement would be a C-"762".
762 was in the running for the C-32 contract, lost to the 757. Too big.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
flyglobal From Germany, joined Mar 2008, 506 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8860 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13): ..... If EADS ever decides to compete the A-380, it won't be with RR engines.
Nothing to decide for Airbus.
There is no money to win for Airbus to compete with two planes against another offer for two planes where the national champions only offer would be only foreholer he has available and is default must winner.
So as EADS I would write to the presidents plane selection office in a more formal way something like this:
Guys, thank you for asking us for a request for quotation. As you may know we have two type of forholer planes on offer. Out A340-500 or 600 model, which many heads of state as well as private customers choose, and as well we could offer you the largest passenger Jet currently produced, the A380.
As we believe that you may have at first an obligation to use a plane designed and manufactured in the United States, you may have at first choose Boeings 748i as a first default logical choice to consider. So at that time given this situation we would not see much sense to compete with an offer from our side unless you want to downsize or upsize from your current VC25 and advise us differently.
In case your needs call for either downsizing or a larger plane in the size of our A380 we would be happy to help you out and work together on an appropriate specification and condition. Thank you for asking us, we would be happy to recieve your call then.
Flight152 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 3295 posts, RR: 7 Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8619 times:
Quoting bj87 (Thread starter): But how about a 777-300? It's big, American, more economical than the old plane and has a good service history, ignoring the "minor" crashes due to engine issues.
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2262 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 8389 times:
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 16): Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 15):
but I personally think a good C-32 replacement would be a C-"762".
762 was in the running for the C-32 contract, lost to the 757. Too big.
I wasn't aware, thanks. Is there any other info on the "C-767" proposal?
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2530 posts, RR: 6 Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8286 times:
After EADS gets the new USAF tanker deal, the USAF will very seriously consider the A-380 as they very insistently asked EADS to give them an idea as to what the A-380 could offer. After the KC-30 becoming the KC-45, a VC-380 is not that far out of the realm of possibility. The 748i offers more room than the existing VC-25 but trust me, the USAF salivates at the possibility of an even increased level of room that the A380 offers.
The VC-32's are going no where, the 757 is an excellent platform and they are too young.
HKA098 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 556 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 8266 times:
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 21): The 748i offers more room than the existing VC-25 but trust me, the USAF salivates at the possibility of an even increased level of room that the A380 offers.
sasd209 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Oct 2007, 633 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 8231 times:
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 21): as they very insistently asked EADS to give them an idea as to what the A-380 could offer.
"They" did? Who is 'they' (the USAF senior generals? 89th Airlift Wing? WHMO?) and is there a source that you could cite for us? As EADS states in reply #8's link:
"After careful review, we've determined that participation in the Air Force One program will not help us meet these business objectives."
I've not seen EADS offer anything to the contrary of that public statement.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5918 posts, RR: 8 Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8160 times:
Quoting CharlieNoble (Reply 10): As for Air Force One, I agree with the 748i. I think Airbus is out not because of nationalism as much as because the American President MUST be seen as supporting American industry. It's ultimately all about the economy...buying a "foreign" plane would be bad public relations.
I wonder whose idea that is, the Secret Service, US Navy and the Congress who funded the purchase of a Non-American Helicopter for the Office of the President of The United States did not seem to think that flying around in that a/c meant anything, especially an a/c which is seen on the White House lawn on a regular basis with photo ops, but as a poster in another thread stated, Air Force One is totally different, go figure.
Quoting flyglobal (Reply 17): Nothing to decide for Airbus.
There is no money to win for Airbus to compete with two planes against another offer for two planes where the national champions only offer would be only foreholer he has available and is default must winner.
That seems to be what some Americans do not get as it relates to the tanker bid, it is all about the money and not what a/c is best for the troops.
However, when the Office of The President of The United States visits Africa, Europe or Asia flying in on a European designed and built A380 powered by RR engines, I'm sure the Americans will state with pride that it is all about globalization, and the Europeans will agree, no one will dare suggest that this is the best the American's can do.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1628 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8140 times:
Quoting par13del (Reply 23): That seems to be what some Americans do not get as it relates to the tanker bid, it is all about the money and not what a/c is best for the troops.
. . . and the ability for Airbus to build a new A330 plant in the US on the US Tax Payer's dime. An AF1 A380 won't get them that . . . so why bother?
Besides, how many airports in the US will support the weight of an A380 . . . given that an AF1 A380 may not have the Max Landing weight of a typical commercial A380. From a logistics and campaigning standpoint, wouldn't you want to maximize the number of place you can fly into? Or is that also a red herring?
25 par13del: Ah, but that is US globalization versus a transfer of technonlogy, US technolgy has been used in other countries to develop native industires, how ex
26 bikerthai: Your Joe the tax payer wouldn't care about the difference. Like you said . . bikerthai
27 rwessel: The A380 can pretty much use any runway a 747 can. What's important is the weight distribution, not the absolute weight. While the A380 has somewhat
28 bikerthai: Then could we assume that a A380 will be able to land at most if not all Air Force bases in the US? With all things considered could it have landed i
29 rwessel: Assuming they can handle a 747 now. Both have handled 747s in the past. Obviously for any specific airfield, someone will need to run the numbers to
30 328JET: Please keep in mind that the new B747 is much longer than current ones, which will limit the number of airfields as well. The A380 is limited by wings
31 kanban: OK there will be one new plane in 2017, and EADS / Airbus has said they are not interested in competing even if asked... so why blather on about non i
32 PC12Fan: As is the case with other subjects on A.net, sources would be beneficial to prove your point. As rwessel stated, we're not talking about any regular
33 328JET: What exactly are you looking for of my points?
34 PC12Fan: Sorry if that came out a little crass. IMO, they way you worded post #30 made it seem as though these two choices are too big for any airfield and wo
35 AirRyan: Go back and review the chronology of the news articles on the subject, not only did (and still do) the USAF want a competitive bid, they wanted to (a
37 par13del: Competitie bid for 3 a/c, they gotta be kidding. This a/c should not be about what the 89th, the Secret Service or even what the current administrati
38 328JET: In my eyes, the perfect aircraft would not be the B748I or A388, it would be the A346! It is a bit smaller than the B742, but not as big as an A388 or
39 DEVILFISH: I wonder if they'd install this when it comes time to replace the current VC-25s..... . http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...g-bespoke-lift-for-747-
40 PC12Fan: Just my opinion, but I honestly don't think this would be a consideration on the next AF1. Reason? A lot of the nostalgia of the POTUS coming off of
41 kanban: I would think there is a possibility to be used for boarding at home.. the deplaning will continue to be a photo op.. plus there may be security issu
42 PC12Fan: Then they wouldn't waste the money for the modification when the POTUS could just "shlump" it up the stairs at home.
43 bikerthai: Going up is easy . . . going down is more difficult . . . ask one former Michigan football player. bikerthai
44 PC12Fan: But like a good football player, he brushed himself off and started shaking hands.
45 PC12Fan: I can't recall is this question has been asked before but could two 748i fit in the hangar that currently house SAM 28000 and SAM 29000?
46 jsquared: In light of the tanker contract going to Boeing, more orders for the 747-8i, and first flight coming up, is there any chance we might get an official
47 kanban: not unless someone wants to set off a firestorm in congress.....
49 PC12Fan: Nothing quite as humbling as counting chickens before they hatch.
50 rcair1: It is different. The average American (or European, or anybody else) has little or no connection with helicopters - and no idea who makes them. A goo
51 USAF336TFS: Yep, it isn't American, and POTUS flying around in a non-American aircraft where one of the two duoply manufacturers is based just wouldn't make any
52 Mortyman: McDonnell Douglas MD-12 Ilyushin Il-96 Nah, just kidding The new AF1 will be 744 or 748. I don't see the US government using the A380 or A340 for this
53 AirRyan: My bad, I forgot that the USAF had long since traded in their testicles for an extra padded set of knee pads. Seriously, can anyone really sit here w
54 USAF336TFS: I can. Read the RFP. Boeing KC-135s are 50 plus years old. 25 year life cycle was a gift to your beloved EADS, and more importantly, totally unrealis
55 srbmod: This thread is not about the KC-X tanker and as the result of taking this thread off-topic, it is now locked.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6835 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 27 posts, 
From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Oct 2007, 633 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5918 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
