Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 Next Air Force One?  
User currently offlineBoeingluvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11063 times:

Hey just caught wind that there are a couple of orders for the US government for 787's. Possible AF1 replacement? Is this true or did I just hear wrong? Obviously I have no links or written evidence. Just rumors. Can anyone else enlighten me?

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4003 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11055 times:

Quoting Boeingluvr (Thread starter):
Possible AF1 replacement?

Extremely doubtful - not enough room and the current VC-25s are low hour 747s with lots of future in them.


User currently offlineBoeingluvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11040 times:

Obviously they are. Just a rumor that 2 unknows are for the US government. Could that category cover NASA? I suppose they could be for the Air Force or Navy but that wouldn't really make sense I don't think. Possibly NASA would make sense but for what?

User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26598 posts, RR: 75
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11038 times:

Well, they may end up as Air Force One at some point, as any Air Force aircraft with the President on it will. As far as replacing the VC-25s and E4-Bs, not a chance. If anything, the 748I will replace the VC-25s and the VC-25s will replace the E4-Bs.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11037 times:

IMHO the replacement of AF1 (which won't be for a while anyway) are more likely to be 748's. Hey who knows, they may opt for the a389...  duck 


L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineBoeingluvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11006 times:

I'm doubting an A389 or any Airbus for that matter. I believe the government would stay loyal to Boeing. They've been their provider for AF1 for quite some time, ever since the 707's. Why go from American made to French? Not to mention as some consider for Boeing to be the better of both(matter of opinion) and I'm sure Boeing holds quite a few secrets to all the extras the government wants.

[Edited 2007-07-23 10:50:57]

User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26598 posts, RR: 75
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 10987 times:

Quoting Boeingluvr (Reply 5):
I believe the government would stay loyal to Boeing. They've been their provider for AF1 for quite some time, ever since the 707's. Why go from American made to French?

I tend to agree, though the new helicopter for the presidential fleet is going to be an Anglo-Italian product with US badges stuck on it.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineBoeingluvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 10973 times:

Yes but a lot less public and common knowledge then AF1 would be.

User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 10913 times:

Quoting Boeingluvr (Reply 7):
Yes but a lot less public and common knowledge then AF1 would be.

When the time comes to replace AF1, it will be with a US designed and built aircraft. No way would Congress permit the President to fly around the world in a foreign built aircraft.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 10907 times:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 8):
When the time comes to replace AF1, it will be with a US designed and built aircraft. No way would Congress permit the President to fly around the world in a foreign built aircraft.

No it' s different then you think / feel, he/she will.



Maybe AF1 a launch customer for the Boeing Y3?


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 10881 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 9):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 8):
When the time comes to replace AF1, it will be with a US designed and built aircraft. No way would Congress permit the President to fly around the world in a foreign built aircraft.

No it' s different then you think / feel, he/she will.

I said "fly around the world" Keesje, not for short hops from the White House to Andrews AFB.

We trust European aircraft for those short duration flights.  Wink

But if you really think AF1 going to ever be an Airbus product, it's time for your employer to institute random drug testing.  biggrin 


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 10868 times:

Quoting Boeingluvr (Thread starter):
Hey just caught wind that there are a couple of orders for the US government for 787's. Possible AF1 replacement? Is this true or did I just hear wrong? Obviously I have no links or written evidence. Just rumors. Can anyone else enlighten me?

Might the 787s be replacedments for airplanes currently in the SAM (special air mission) fleet? Aren't there still some VC-135s serving that fleet?



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12158 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 10854 times:

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 11):
Might the 787s be replacedments for airplanes currently in the SAM (special air mission) fleet? Aren't there still some VC-135s serving that fleet?

Yes, there are still a few VC-135Cs in the inventory (in Hawaii and Europe, IIRC). But, there is no need to replace these airplanes.


User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 10820 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 4):
IMHO the replacement of AF1 (which won't be for a while anyway) are more likely to be 748's.

AF1 replacement is much farther in the future. Almost certainly Y3.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 10805 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 6):
I tend to agree, though the new helicopter for the presidential fleet is going to be an Anglo-Italian product with US badges stuck on it.

An Anglo-Italian helicopter is a far cry from an airliner whose manufacturer is widely perceived to be French, and in practice, is at least partially dominated by that country. You may not like that statement, but that's a big reason why.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineBoeingluvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10727 times:

When the time comes who makes the final decision?

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10668 times:

Quoting N328KF (Reply 14):
An Anglo-Italian helicopter is a far cry from an airliner whose manufacturer is widely perceived to be French, and in practice, is at least partially dominated by that country. You may not like that statement, but that's a big reason why.

Yes, what was it agian, those folks participate in Afghanistan but said the Iraq invasion was a bad idea, unforgiveable..


User currently offlineSinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1649 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10584 times:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 10):
I said "fly around the world" Keesje, not for short hops from the White House to Andrews AFB.

I'd take a look at these.......  footinmouth 


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Filip Koska
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wu Weiqiang



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fred Seggie - WorldAirImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter Poulsen



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rob Bominaar - MST-Aviation
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fabrice Sanchez - Brussels Aviation Photography



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Okkert Brits
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerhard Plomitzer



The VH-60 seems to be quit a world traveler, I don't see why the VH-71 will not be one also.



My Country can beat up your Country....
User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10559 times:

Quoting Sinlock (Reply 17):
I'd take a look at these....... ÊÊ


The VH-60 seems to be quit a world traveler, I don't see why the VH-71 will not be one also.

What is it with you and Keesje?

Of course the new Presidential helicopter will be ferried around the world, but it won't actually be flying under its own power around the world.

I don't know though. Maybe those crafty Europeans have found a way to fly a helicopter across the Atlantic on its own power.  Wink


User currently onlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3417 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10539 times:

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 18):
I don't know though. Maybe those crafty Europeans have found a way to fly a helicopter across the Atlantic on its own power.

If you hated the pilots enough you could ferry them over with in-air refueling. Don't mind me if I'd give that a miss from either side of the refueling bit. I'm sure its cheaper and safer to just stuff them in the back of a transport.... faster too.


User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10535 times:

the VH-60 easily folds up and fits into a C-17, which it why it travels. as far as the VH-71 is concerned, i doubt that it would fit as easily into a C-17.


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 10431 times:

My guess is that a possible 787 buy would be to replace either the 757's...as that is really what the 787 is for in the first place...or some of the older models like some here have already pointed out. I think if Airbus had a building facility here in the US, then they might stand a chance for a bid on presidential aircraft because the building process could be closely monitored. Not to mention maintenance and improvements could be accomplished close to home. Just my two cents.

User currently offlineDL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 10315 times:

they could replace the 757's but not the 747's I think the 748 will be the best replacement (A380 would be cool but it probably won't happen)

User currently offlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2453 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10242 times:

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 21):

Makes sense to me. As many others have said here, the VC-25 is still a young pup when it comes to total hours. However, I wouldn't doubt that replacement talk is underway. The term "pork barrel" comes to mind.

A "VC-787" may be possible for domestic routes though. Maybe some are hearing the grumblings of people wondering why a 747 is transporting the POTUS across a couple states when a smaller aircraft would do. A plane the size of a 787-8 had the range and size to support such missions, but wouldn't up to the "Flying White house" standards. But if the VC-25 were to replaced today, I can't see it being anything but the 747-8. Especially if the "attic space" is utilized to increase the aircrafts capability. I understand that the VC-25 can do almost everything the E4-B's can do. If this is the case, then a "VC-748" would replace both the VC-25 and E4-B's.



Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
User currently onlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3417 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10176 times:

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 23):
Makes sense to me. As many others have said here, the VC-25 is still a young pup when it comes to total hours. However, I wouldn't doubt that replacement talk is underway. The term "pork barrel" comes to mind.

A "VC-787" may be possible for domestic routes though. Maybe some are hearing the grumblings of people wondering why a 747 is transporting the POTUS across a couple states when a smaller aircraft would do. A plane the size of a 787-8 had the range and size to support such missions, but wouldn't up to the "Flying White house" standards. But if the VC-25 were to replaced today, I can't see it being anything but the 747-8. Especially if the "attic space" is utilized to increase the aircrafts capability. I understand that the VC-25 can do almost everything the E4-B's can do. If this is the case, then a "VC-748" would replace both the VC-25 and E4-B's.

yah, I could certainly see acquiring a single 748 for the president, leaving the VC25's as backup. the VP/Press/Whatever could have a small fleet of 787 as these have the range for effortless transpacific operations so it would be no reason to swap to 747's on that factor.

The 748 built frame out to be Airforce 1, would likely be a very economical decision as the running costs will be far lower, and the use of modern electronics should provide for far cheaper serviceability and future upgrades. If total size is a problem, I'm not sure it would be hard to talk Boeing into a one off 744 length plane given it would be delivered "green" for conversion anyway... (also would have its own flight test program regardless of how close to "stock" it is)


25 Lehpron : I'm not sure I would want my tax money to go into that kind of extravagance.
26 PC12Fan : It's already gone into two 747's, what difference does it make?
27 Playloud : Would it be possible to re-engine the two AF1 jets with the GEnx (747-8) engines? This would be far cheaper than purchasing new planes.
28 Post contains images WrenchBender : Actually Halls thats how the canadian forces took delivery of thier 15 EH101's. Italy-Scotland-Iceland-Greenland-Canada WrenchBender
29 Halls120 : LOL, that's one hell of a flight! Of course, I meant a nonstop flight across the Atlantic.....
30 LimaNiner : EADS, the Airbus's "mothership", is a *European* company, not a "French" company. 22.5% of its shares are owned by DaimlerChrysler (which I'd call a
31 Par13del : For me the issue is not that the a/c is either French, or Anglo-Italian, but that the Office of the President of The United States, the only real supe
32 F27Friendship : This only holds untill someone else builds something better, like the US101 which is now the presidential helocopter, or as you pointed out, using th
33 Post contains images SEPilot : Maybe they're for Nancy Pelosi?
34 EBJ1248650 : Would you elaborate on why there is no need to replace these planes? Low airframe time? Might using the 787 for the SAM mission in Europe be an image
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 787 Next Air Force One?
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...
Air Force One Replacement? posted Mon Jun 25 2007 02:38:55 by Boeingluvr
Who Designed The "Air Force One" Scheme? posted Sun Jun 10 2007 18:47:46 by JayDavis
Air Force One In FCO Tomorrow! posted Thu Jun 7 2007 23:35:20 by Wingedarrow
Air Force One Departure From IAD? posted Sun Jun 3 2007 04:22:27 by RJpieces
Replacement For German Air Force One posted Sat Apr 21 2007 23:19:21 by LXA340
Any Immediate Plans For A New Air Force One? posted Fri Mar 9 2007 18:07:56 by B777A340Fan
Place Setting Aboard Air Force One posted Sun Jan 14 2007 21:18:51 by Door5Right
Could Air Force One Ever Be A Twin? posted Wed Jan 10 2007 02:32:36 by Tugger
Gerald Ford And Air Force One Memories posted Wed Dec 27 2006 15:23:23 by DTW757
Refueling Air Force One Overseas - Who Pays? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 00:53:34 by BEYauty

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format