kimon
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 2:37 pm

Air Force One & Co.

Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:29 pm

What are they powered by?GE or PW?
Have they upgraded their flightdecks to -400 standard ie 2-man crew and LCD?

[Edited 2010-01-07 10:31:12 by kimon]
Dum Romae consulitur, Saguntum expugnatur
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:16 pm



Quoting Kimon (Thread starter):
What are they powered by?GE or PW?
Have they upgraded their flightdecks to -400 standard ie 2-man crew and LCD?

CF6-80C2B1

The cockpit is a modified 200/300 type. Some steam gauges, some glass.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11093
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:43 pm



Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 1):
The cockpit is a modified 200/300 type. Some steam gauges, some glass.

I believe that they still have a flight engineer, and Air Force One still carries a navigator along with a fairly large complement of communications and electronics specialists as well. The cockpit is a mixture of glass and guages, since remember that these planes are realtively young.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
lhcvg
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:14 pm

Am I just being a techie-nerd here, or am I missing something that going to a full glass MFD cockpit would allow them to take full advantage of various high-tech navigation/protection/etc. tools?
 
thegman
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:30 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:44 am



Quoting LHCVG (Reply 3):
Am I just being a techie-nerd here, or am I missing something that going to a full glass MFD cockpit would allow them to take full advantage of various high-tech navigation/protection/etc. tools?

But they're not going to do that at this point because an RFP is out for a possible replacement.
 
lhcvg
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:52 am



Quoting TheGMan (Reply 4):
But they're not going to do that at this point because an RFP is out for a possible replacement.

Good to know. I didn't realize that that was official yet.
 
zanl188
Posts: 3436
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sun Jan 17, 2010 12:15 pm



Quoting TheGMan (Reply 4):
But they're not going to do that at this point because an RFP is out for a possible replacement.

How do you know this? Just because an RFP is out for a replacement in the next decade doesn't mean the aircraft won't be upgraded in the meantime....
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:50 pm



Quoting LHCVG (Reply 5):
Quoting TheGMan (Reply 4):
But they're not going to do that at this point because an RFP is out for a possible replacement.

Good to know. I didn't realize that that was official yet.

Yes, and since EADS has said they will they will not offer an A-380-800-VIP, it look like the only offer will come from Boeing offering the B-747-8I-BBJ/VIP.

 bigthumbsup 
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Mon Jan 18, 2010 2:06 pm

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 3):
Am I just being a techie-nerd here, or am I missing something that going to a full glass MFD cockpit would allow them to take full advantage of various high-tech navigation/protection/etc. tools?

Actually both VC-25A aircraft are already upgraded with a partial glass cockpit.
The navigation system is fully updated with FMS and GPS and LCD navigation screens.

see this Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) of the 747-2G4B (VC-25A) :

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...A4?OpenDocument&Highlight=747-2g4b

Also the GE CF6-80C2B1 engines, with PMC, a sort of supervisory digital fuel control, are the most powerfull and fuel efficient engines that were offered on the 747-200/300 and are the same as the 747-400, except for the (FADEC) fuelcontrol.
Only seven late production 747-300's were produced with this engines and the two VC-25A's are the only 747-200's powered by these engines.

In fact this aircraft is only 3- 4% less fuel-efficient as the 747-400.

[Edited 2010-01-18 06:18:05]
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Mon Jan 18, 2010 2:58 pm

As we all know the two VC-25As have the GE CF-6-80C2B-1 engines of the B-747-400.

The four C-32As have P&W PW-2040 engines while the two C-32Bs have RR RB-211-535XXs

The C-40B/Cs have the CFM-56-7XX series engines.
 
lmml 14/32
Posts: 2358
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 2:27 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:52 pm

A bit off topic. There used to be a multi part documentary about Air Force One on Youtube. Somehow it has disappeared. I wonder whether this is due to an insturuction by the White House. The video did not reveal much but was enjoyable to view every now and then. Pity.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5547
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Tue Jan 19, 2010 3:36 pm



Quoting LHCVG (Reply 3):
Am I just being a techie-nerd here, or am I missing something that going to a full glass MFD cockpit would allow them to take full advantage of various high-tech navigation/protection/etc. tools?

The big reason for a glass MFD cockpit is to reduce the manpower needs in the cockpit.

Those devices are not substantially more accurate than some of the older technology - the main advantage is that they save the airlines having to pay extra crew members.

As noted above - the VC-25 flies with a full-time flight engineer and a full-time navigator. That reduces the work load of the pilots more than a full glass MFD cockpit. The pilots are also only responsible for direct communications with ATC. All the other communciations with ACARS, the airline ops center, dispatchers, etc - is handled by the communications specialists on board.

If they were to get into an situation like many airline crews where they needed to communicate with the HQ maintenance staff about troubleshooting an issue on the aircraft - on the VC-25 the pilots would not have to devote their attention to that problem - the flight engineer would be doing that job.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Tue Jan 19, 2010 3:47 pm



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 11):
As noted above - the VC-25 flies with a full-time flight engineer and a full-time navigator. That reduces the work load of the pilots more than a full glass MFD cockpit

Thanks, I couldn't have explained it better.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 2555
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:02 am



Quoting LMML 14/32 (Reply 10):
There used to be a multi part documentary about Air Force One on Youtube. Somehow it has disappeared. I wonder whether this is due to an insturuction by the White House. The video did not reveal much but was enjoyable to view every now and then.

Was that from the National Geographic (NatGeo) TV show from a few years back? If so, I would suspect it was more due to copyright infringement complaints from NatGeo rather than from the White House.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sat Jan 23, 2010 1:22 pm

I think you are right Moose135. NatGeo TV "owned" the copyrights to those videos.
 
zanl188
Posts: 3436
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sat Jan 23, 2010 1:39 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
I think you are right Moose135. NatGeo TV "owned" the copyrights to those videos.

I don't the particulars of this case, but the White House is, and has been thru many administrations, fanatical regarding the proper use of it's "trademarks" - Presidential Seal, Air Force One, etc. Witness the recent debacle regarding the pix of Obama and his jacket.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:07 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 9):
The four C-32As have P&W PW-2040 engines while the two C-32Bs have RR RB-211-535XXs

To my knowledge there are only "straight" C-32s, and all of them have PW engines. But correct me if I'm wrong.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
zanl188
Posts: 3436
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:30 pm



Quoting A342 (Reply 16):
To my knowledge there are only "straight" C-32s, and all of them have PW engines. But correct me if I'm wrong.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Konstantin von Wedelstaedt



757, USAF tail#, RR engines....
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One & Co.

Sun Jan 24, 2010 1:05 pm



Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 17):
757, USAF tail#, RR engines....

757-23A, Serial number 25494, L/N 611, registration N987AN, owner AnstWW, leased by
Avianca, delivered 04/94
Owner changed to Rayethon E-systems 02-11-00
N-registration canceled at 21-12-01
Seen with number 25001 and later with 09001.

Also another 757-23A is operated by the USAF. (Both 227th Special Operations flight at Mc. Guire ?) Number 02-4452 or 24452.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Stedman

Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests