Wilax From United States, joined Jun 2002, 462 posts, RR: 4 Posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5572 times:
How long will US presidents be forced to fly around in 30+ yaer old aircraft? A 747-200 as our Chief Executive's private jet?!. Even with updated engines, the fuel economy and range cannot compare with newer materials and technology. What about structural fatigue and maintainance? How about a shiny new 744ER or even a 773ER? Why stick with those old types? I would assume that we would never use an A380 which would probably come with UN-linked remote control--but I digress...
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5496 times:
How long will US presidents be forced to fly around in 30+ yaer old aircraft? A 747-200 as our Chief Executive's private jet?
It isn't more than 15 years old
What about structural fatigue and maintainance?
The AF1 birds are flown so rarely, they havn't even begun to reach their maximum number of cycles. I'd wager that a commercial 747 goes through more wear and tear in a year of opperations than the AF1 birds will go through in their entire lives.
And the there are no shortage of spares for the 747
? How about a shiny new 744ER or even a 773ER? Why stick with those old types?
Because it cost billions of dollars to swap types ever 2 years when a new model comes out. The USAF doesn't take a stock airliner and throw in a bed, desk, and press box... these aircraft are gutted and rebuilt with customized avionics, wiring, engines, counter-measures, in-flight refueling, lower level airstairs, ect.
I would assume that we would never use an A380 which would probably come with UN-linked remote control--but I digress...
The same logic might be applied to the FBW 777 family
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13565 posts, RR: 68 Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5493 times:
It's not really 30 years old. More like less than 20 years old.
The two VC-25s are used very little and are maintained with a meticulousness bordering on ridiculous. They have more than a little service life left. I wouldn't be surprised if they flew for another 15 years or more.
How would it look for the Executive to give itself two shiny new toys with the huge federal, regardless of the fact that they would have little material impact on it?
If you're not an aviation buff, you just see a big plane anyway.
UN-linked remote control. The correct abbreviation would be "EU". The A380 will never be used as long as there are US-built options.
Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic
LHR27C From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 1196 posts, RR: 26 Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5485 times:
I think you're underestimating the VC-25As. They are certainly not the average 747-200. They incorporate all the 747-400's avionics, and there are a number of extras Boeing fitted as well. I believe they have enhanced performance so that they perform better on short runways, as well as having a whole lot of extra fuel tanks giving a very large range (1/2 way round the world I think).
They are also not that old, delivered as recently as 1990. There are vast numbers of security systems on board. Replacing the VC-25As would be unnecessary and expensive. Compare the USA with here in the UK- apart from the 146s of the Royal Flight, there is no form of "private jet" for the PM. Infact Blair tends to charter an average BA 777 for most of his trips!
[Edited 2004-08-08 19:45:44]
Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
NWA757 From United States, joined Aug 2003, 172 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5464 times:
The current Airforce 1 Boeing 747-200 has very low flight time and is relatively young. However, I believe that it could be possible to see a 747-400 as Airforce 1 in the not too distant future. For now, the current one is doing it's job fine. **Please keep in mind that any aircraft carrying the president will carry the callsign Airforce One.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5443 times:
**Please keep in mind that any aircraft carrying the president will carry the callsign Airforce One.
Any USAF aircraft. When Bush was on-board the what-ever-it-was that took him out to the Abraham Lincoln, he was not on-board "Air Force One." Also, the Marine Corps. helicopter that ferries him from Andrews AFB to the White House goes by the call sign "Marine One."
And even more confusing, the Secret Service calls the VC-25s "Angle One" as well.
EALSYS1 From United States, joined Jan 2001, 227 posts, RR: 28 Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5393 times:
The current AirForce One is roughly 15 years old. The previous generation was a 707 that was around for about 30 years, from JFK to GHWB. There is NO need to replace these!
Spacepope From Vatican City State (Holy See), joined Dec 1999, 1928 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5380 times:
Don't forget Eisenhower flew on VC-137s too!
The KC-135 issue shows how long you can keep a well-maintained but rarely flown airframe in servicew. The KC-135 tanker fleet today averages about 17,000 flight hours on each airframe. USAir's A330s have more hours on them already.
Lnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1531 posts, RR: 23 Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5295 times:
I can't believe how often this question comes up.
Perhaps we need to have a "FAQ" msg circulated once a week, that the regulars can ignore.
That, and the NW DC-9, Dirty Air France, Bad Air Canada, crappy SouthWest. hahah (Btw, those aren't my opinions, those are just snippets of usual conversations).
PErhaps a FAQ could be dellivered on a weekly basis to quell these questions hahaa
SafetyDude From United States, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 23 Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5229 times:
there are a number of extras Boeing fitted as well. I believe they have enhanced performance so that they perform better on short runways, as well as having a whole lot of extra fuel tanks giving a very large range (1/2 way round the world I think).
The Air Force also fitted a number of extra things, which are top secret.
The current Airforce 1 Boeing 747-200
There are two AF1s, both of which are nearly identical on the outside, except for their registration. For the interiors, the aircraft that was built last is slightly more advanced than the first one.
Ha763 From United States, joined Jan 2003, 2794 posts, RR: 8 Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5160 times:
Why is AF1 a 747-200? Because when it was ordered, that was the 747 model available. The VC-25s were ordered by Reagan and went through many design delays before being built and even more delays during the modification. The VC-25s were delivered late and over budget.
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5048 times:
How long will US presidents be forced to fly around in 30+ yaer old aircraft?
How about a shiny new 744ER?
I hate it when someone contradicts themselves. They are both based on a 30+ year old designs, slick. Besides, if you'll excuse my bad english, there ain't a damn thing wrong with these "30+ year old designs". The VC-25 is, IMO, one of the most elegant, impressive and awesome large aircraft ever built.
P.S. Part of me hopes to see a 744 "Air Force One". That would be sharp.
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13565 posts, RR: 68 Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5004 times:
The planes we are talking about are called VC-25A's. There are two. The "Air Force One" moniker is just a callsign.
IF the president is on board an E-4B (NEACP) the callsign would still be "Air Force One"
Callsigns for the president's aircraft:
- Air Force One
- Marine One (usually the presidential chopper. The presidential squadron operates Sikorsky VH-3D Sea Kings and VH-60N Black Hawks)
- Navy One (when the president visits an aircraft carrier, this would probably be a C-2A Greyhound)
- Army One
- I can't remember what the non-military one, but I think it's "Executive One"?
Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic
767-332ER From United States, joined Mar 2001, 2028 posts, RR: 17 Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4913 times:
As it has been mentioned before, AF1 is the denomination given to the aircraft belonging to the Air Force in which the Commander-in-chief flies in, so the VC-25 a/c is not necessarily Air Force 1. There again, the aircraft has the most updated technology for a 747-200 and it is only 15 years old. However, if we wanna play devil's advocate and take a stab at which aircraft the USAF will use as a VIP Presidential plane, I belive the 747-400 will be the likely candidate, of even the 747 advanced that has been planned, but of course, that will be another 15 years down the line.
Regards
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
Wilax From United States, joined Jun 2002, 462 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4890 times:
Boeing Nut,
I didn't say "30+ year old designed aircraft"
I said "30+ year old aircraft"
My query comes from the mindset that a newer airframe is better than an old one even if it is the same model. Thanks to the informative members here, it has been shown that AF1 is not that old, and it has significantly fewer hours on it than the average 742. The extent of further modifications to the aircraft would definitely warrant long-term utilization. It makes sense that it would not be replaced every 5 years or so.
BTW, there is a world of difference between a 747-200 and a 747-400 from a design standpoint; wings, range, composites, flight deck....etc. Really, if you look at modern commercial aircraft, they are all based on the same basic design; A tube with swept-back wings, 2-4 engines, jet fuel, single vertical tail fin, and rear elevators, Comet to Concorde...
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 4795 times:
Thanks to the informative members here, it has been shown that AF1 is not that old, and it has significantly fewer hours on it than the average 742.
True. In fact, the VC-25's are younger than a few 744's as well. As far as flight hours go, the VC-25's is still in it's infancy.
As far as my first sttement goes, I still stand by it, but with less "venom". Even design wise, the 744 is nearly identical to the 742. Outside of the cockpit, winglets and some materials used. There has jusy been some "beefing up" of existing components.
Lurch From United States, joined Jul 2008, 0 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 4761 times:
Hi the JET that took bush out to the Carrier was an S-3 Viking Anti Submarine Patrol air craft! And The two VC-25 air frames are still hardly run in as they do less than 150 flights a year compared with a normal commercial 747 which flies almost every day and the VC-25 machines are fitted with every little thing that the US president mite need or want where ever he may be in the world with communications equipment that would make a radio ham extremely envious and has the ability to take of and land from non standard 747 runways as in airports that a 747 would not normal be able to use so they should have a long life ahead of them about the same as the two Japanese 747-400s that their air self defense force has for vip duties!
RayChuang From United States, joined Jun 2000, 7106 posts, RR: 9 Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4688 times:
The only major upgrades I foresee for the VC-25A's are:
1. Replacement of the original F103-GE-100 engines for more powerful versions, possibly a derivative of the GENX engine used on the upcoming Boeing 7E7.
2. Communications suite upgrades, including the possibility of press facilities that will include a derivative of the Boeing Connexion satellite-based Internet access system.
3. The addition of winglets to improve long-range cruise.
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4638 times:
The only major upgrades I foresee for the VC-25A's are:
1. Replacement of the original F103-GE-100 engines for more powerful versions, possibly a derivative of the GENX engine used on the upcoming Boeing 7E7.
2. Communications suite upgrades, including the possibility of press facilities that will include a derivative of the Boeing Connexion satellite-based Internet access system.
3. The addition of winglets to improve long-range cruise.
With all due respect, none of these are needed or are already in place.
1. If it were needed, the VC-25 can takeoff in less distance than just about any airliner. Rumors are that it can get off the ground in a little over 3,000' if need be. More powerful engines are already in place.
2. You don't think that "Air Force One" has the most advanced communications equipment on the face of the Earth? Believe me, the stuff they have on "Air Force One" makes Connexion look like walkie talkies.
3. With in flight capabilities along with an already impressive range makes winglets totally unnecessary.
RayChuang From United States, joined Jun 2000, 7106 posts, RR: 9 Reply 25, posted (5 years 3 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4623 times:
2. You don't think that "Air Force One" has the most advanced communications equipment on the face of the Earth? Believe me, the stuff they have on "Air Force One" makes Connexion look like walkie talkies.
The current communications system for the President's use is already superb by definition (it can be used as a command post if necessary), but I think the press section of the plane could stand an upgrade. Hence the reason why the press section could get something akin to Connexion so stories, pictures, and video could be uploaded from the press people flying on the plane directly back to the newsroom in real time.
27 Kaitak: Actually, there's a very good National Geographic program on Air Force One, which shows every few months. Clearly, the aircraft has a "standard" cockp
28 N6376m: Pardon me but I think all these comm capabilities may be a bit overstated. The Sept 11 Commission reported that GWB was really pissed that the comm in
29 BENNETT123: The first point, is that Air Force 1 is whatever Bush is in at the time, however for the sack of this thread lets assume that Air Force 1 = VC25, it
30 MD-90: In a national emergency, I don't want the president to be getting pissed because he can't watch TV! Geez... The 742 airframe has an advantage over the
31 Boeing nut: The 742 airframe has an advantage over the 744 airframe--it's lighter (and the additional upper deck space was deemed unnecessary). Probably true. But
32 Garnetpalmetto: The first point, is that Air Force 1 is whatever Bush is in at the time, Again, not true. Air Force One is whatever USAF aircraft he's in at the time.
33 PPGMD: In a national emergency, I don't want the president to be getting pissed because he can't watch TV! Geez... CNN and the other channels are the only wa
34 SATL382G: Folks, If you make a statement that AF1 has such and such a capability you really need to state what your source is. Most people will never get aboard
35 Dw747400: For those talking about more powerful engines--the VC-25A currently uses engines developed for the 747-400, thus giving it a slight performance boost
36 Lapper: What happens when these aircraft are retired, are they broken up? Obviously they're not sold on to another country.
37 Boeing nut: Most, if not all, are in museums currently.
38 Brewha: Looking back at thes archives -- I am actually working a study that is using the PAR alternatives -- what I have learned is that the aircraft itself i
39 Stitch: I doubt spares are going to be an issue. If nothing else, the USAF can grab a dozen or even a score of 747-200s and send em out to AMARG to await cann
40 XT6Wagon: Its not *really* a 742. they were some of the last "742" and revcieved "300" and "400" style parts in the conversion. The conversion from the basic f
41 Gsosbee: The press enjoy a good ride (much better than Y on a commercial airline) and food. They can write their stories and download them within a minute upo
42 Flighty: Why would they do that.... Personally I think the VC-25 should get a 2010-standard cabin (c. $100M / aircraft). Thus for a fairly low price, you get
43 Stitch: 28000 underwent a multi-month overhaul in the 747 paint hangar at PAE last year, so it likely has seen upgrades applied.
44 EMBQA: So far they have all ended up in display.....
45 FlyingClrs727: The VC-25A's would look cool with a set of Aviation Partners blended winglets on the ends of their wings.
47 Wvsuperhornet: the aircraft are not that old. The way they are maintained and kept AF-1 can fly for 50 years and will only need upgraded electronics. With an engine
48 EMBQA: They are NOT 30 years old.... SAM 28000 and SAM 29000 are both only 18 years old....delivered in late 1990. Compared to SAM 27000 retired at 30yrs ol
49 Venus6971: Welcome back Satl382g, C-137B 58-6970 was retired because it had more pressure cycles than flt hours, pilots building time before retiremnet with yea
50 KC135TopBoom: Don't forget, these two airplanes were bought used, from the airlines, both were originally B-707-320Bs.
51 Mark5388916: If those VC-25s are truely 18yrs old (I believe is correct) they're exactly as old as me. Born, Sept. 18, 1990. Those things have HUGE amounts of life
52 SP90: Better question is when are they going to put the 744 winglets on the VC-25s. Is there anything on board that would preclude the installation of said
53 Flighty: I do not think the 744 has the same wing. Someone feel free to correct me about the VC-25 specifically. Even if it has the 742 wing, the Aviation Par
54 KC135TopBoom: Since the VC-25A is air refuelable, additional range isn't needed. IIRC, they already have an unrefueled range in excess of 8200nm.
55 Flynavy: You appear to have a severe case of shiny jet syndrome.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Jun 2002, 462 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13565 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 1196 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Dec 2003, 51 posts, .gif){kind=small}
From Vatican City State (Holy See), joined Dec 1999, 1928 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1531 posts, 
They are both based on a 30+ year old designs, slick. Besides, if you'll excuse my bad english, there ain't a damn thing wrong with these "30+ year old designs". The VC-25 is, IMO, one of the most elegant, impressive and awesome large aircraft ever built.
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
