Flighty
Topic Author
Posts: 7681
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:22 am

Early this year, US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was harping that she could not get a transcon-capable executive jet to get to her home base in California from Washington, nonstop. People called her complainer.

That got me to thinking... she is the #3 in line for the presidency... and exactly how big of an executive jet fleet does our government have, anyway? Was her request reasonable, considering her high rank, or not?

To help answer, let's examine the fleet...

(2) VC-25A [747-200M with -400 avionics and engines]

(4) C-30 [757-200 with extra tanks, 5500nm range]

Plus, there are some other mid-size and small executive jets ---

C-37 Gulfstream V

Gulfstream IV / G400/G450

Gulfstream III

Cessna Citation

Gulfstream G100/G150

Bombardier Challenger 600

C-21 Learjet

Any others (BBJ?)

If you know the fleet counts for these smaller types, or their deployments, please state. Also, special note that Sec. Rumsfeld was using the E-4B fleet as his transport, aka the "doomsday" 747 airplanes. To date, Speaker Pelosi has not requested the E-4B to carry her.  Smile

Thanks.
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:44 am

8 specially modified UH-60Ls. Absolutely incredible interiors, looks like my living room!

I actually had an offer a month ago to go work there and fly VIP, and eventually transition fixed wing for VIP transport. But I turned it down because I did a few VIP missions in Iraq, and it was boring as all hell. I definitely like the dirty flying a lot more.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5214
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:54 am

Quoting Flighty (Thread starter):
Any others (BBJ?)

The last of the three C-40Cs that address the lack of transcontinental range of congressional and senior government officials' transport just got delivered last month.....

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q4/071120a_nr.html


Quote:
" ST. LOUIS, Nov. 20, 2007 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] Friday delivered the third of three C-40C transport aircraft to the U.S. Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC), providing a critical airlift asset to government leaders on official business.

Maj. Gen. Robert Duignan, commander, 4th Air Force, accepted the aircraft at Boeing facilities in Seattle and flew it to Scott Air Force Base (AFB), Ill., where it will begin service with the AFRC.

The 932nd and 375th Airlift Wings, units of the AFRC and Air Mobility Command respectively, will use the Next-Generation 737-700 Boeing Business Jet derivative to provide congressional delegations and senior government personnel safe, secure and reliable transportation -- often to remote locations around the world -- while supporting their need to conduct in-flight business.

[.....]

Aircraft modifications include military avionics that augment the 737's commercial flight deck; satellite communications equipment for passenger use; a reconfigurable interior that comprises 40 business-class seats, two work areas with conference table or divan and accommodations for 11 crew members; and auxiliary fuel tanks that extend the aircraft's range to approximately 4,400 nautical miles.

The airplane joins a family of 18 C-40s already in service with the U.S. government: three C-40Cs with the Air National Guard at Andrews AFB, Md., as well as the two already delivered to AFRC at Scott AFB; four Air Force C-40Bs supporting the U.S. Combatant Commands at Andrews, Ramstein AFB, Germany, and Hickam AFB, Hawaii; and the U.S. Navy Reserve's nine C-40As stationed at Naval Air Stations North Island, Calif., Fort Worth, Texas, and Jacksonville, Fla."


http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q4/071120a_pr.html

I guess there would be no more cause of complaints from Congress.  Smile

[Edited 2007-12-08 23:08:14]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:46 pm



Quoting Flighty (Thread starter):
(2) VC-25A [747-200M with -400 avionics and engines]

(4) C-30 [757-200 with extra tanks, 5500nm range]

Plus, there are some other mid-size and small executive jets ---

C-37 Gulfstream V

Gulfstream IV / G400/G450

Gulfstream III

Cessna Citation

Gulfstream G100/G150

Bombardier Challenger 600


C-21 Learjet

Any others (BBJ?)

The VC-25As also use the B-747-300 landing gear, and has duel APUs.,

The B-757-200s are called C-32As & Bs, there are no C-30s

The G-IIIs and G-IVs are called C-20A/B

The C-21As (Lear-35) are not part of the VIP fleet.

Quoting Flighty (Thread starter):
Early this year, US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was harping that she could not get a transcon-capable executive jet to get to her home base in California from Washington, nonstop. People called her complainer.

That got me to thinking... she is the #3 in line for the presidency...

Actually, the Speaker of the House is #2 in line for the Presidency, the VP is #1, the POTUS is already President.

But, Speaker Pelosi is a complainer. The airplane range issue was for the C-20A offered her, and that was only when going west bound during the winter months. The real issue was she wasn't allowed, by the USAF, to take her political cronies with her. She wanted to be able to take as many as 45 people along with her to SFO. She wanted a C-32, and preferred the "B" model because it has no US Military markings, it is all white. The two C-32Bs are for the Secratary of State and high State Department missions where military markings are not approreate.

The USAF offerd "Queen Nancy" a bigger airplane than Speaker of the House Hastler had, she was offered the C-20A, he got a Citiation.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5214
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:49 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 3):
The real issue was she wasn't allowed, by the USAF, to take her political cronies with her. She wanted to be able to take as many as 45 people along with her to SFO. She wanted a C-32, and preferred the "B" model because it has no US Military markings, it is all white. The two C-32Bs are for the Secratary of State and high State Department missions where military markings are not approreate.

Let's look at the livery choices now available for the C-40 series.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alan Lebeda
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fredrik Granberg


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Zhang hua
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jonathan Derden - Spot This!


Well, not bad - not bad at all. I can understand that the quick change C-40A combi may be a bit off-putting, and see the preference for the anonymous white bird, but doesn't the Minuteman on the winglets give the military affilitiation away? Whatever, 40 persons is a generous limit for a state delegation.

Edit: Note the "Air Force 3" caption on the third photo - quite creative of the photographer!

[Edited 2007-12-11 11:00:47]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
JohnM
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:25 pm

UH-60, I think you made a good choice. I did LOTS of VIP stuff in Iraq. I got used to most of the dog and pony show events, but sometimes those aides can be a pain. The big guys were pretty decent 98% of the time. Regular line guys fly more, and being cooked alive while fully suited up waiting for somebody in the Iraq summer isn't fun. I would guess back in the States, the BS meter would go up several notches doing VIP stuff.

We tried to kinda clean the birds up for VIP missions in theater, but it was a lost cause for the most part. I do remember that we had a bit of a small (at least to me) hydraulic leak, which would drip a bit from the overhead, right by the sliding door. Dropped off a VIP, and the drips had misted in the airstream, and left a perfect outline of a person on the seat, where the guy had been sitting. I'm sure he wondered how all that oil got all over him. Back here, all the birds have to be soooo pretty, that would have been a big deal. That bird was a great flier, but we called it the Exxon Valdez for a reason!
 
ShyFlyer
Posts: 4698
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:38 pm

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:01 am

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 4):
but doesn't the Minuteman on the winglets give the military affilitiation away?

Only to those who know its association with the National Guard, which is probably very few.

[Edited 2007-12-11 19:02:53]
I lift things up and put them down.
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13072
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:29 am



Quoting Flighty (Thread starter):
VC-25A [747-200M with -400 avionics and engines]

The VC-25A does not have the -400 avionics, that's a common misconception. It does have CF6-80 engines, which are used primarily on 747-400s and 767s (without counting A300/A310s, A330s and MD-11s), though the CF6-80 has in fact been already used on a few 747-300s.
 
ShyFlyer
Posts: 4698
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:38 pm

RE: US Military Exectutive Transport Fleet?

Wed Dec 12, 2007 4:11 am



Quoting LTU932 (Reply 7):
The VC-25A does not have the -400 avionics, that's a common misconception.

 checkmark 
Most recent photo that I'm aware of:
I lift things up and put them down.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: UltraAmps and 9 guests