• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Feb 03, 2015 7:44 pm

Quoting na (Reply 198):
... late-build frames will be cheap. Odd only that within two years or even less the next Japanese "AF1" will be old type planes. Hardly appropriate for a high-tech nation ...

More of the wing of the 77W is made in Japan than will be true for the 777-9.
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:14 pm

I'm wondering if the 748I will fit inside the current AF1 hangar. ?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:48 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 201):
I'm wondering if the 748I will fit inside the current AF1 hangar?


I would expect it will. The wingspan of the 747-8 is just under 9m more than the VC-25. The ~6m of extra fuselage length won't be an issue.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Feb 04, 2015 12:10 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 202):

What about that rumored third airframe?
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
queb
Posts: 875
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:00 am

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 203):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 202):

What about that rumored third airframe?

Not a rumor:

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4e439f9ebfcb683c6295d9f940bcb97d&tab=core&_cview=0

"The scope of the effort will include the management, design (to include any necessary studies or analyses), integration, modification (including but not limited to structural modifications), test/verification, certification, pre-operational support, and training to deliver up to three Boeing 747-8 aircraft to be Presidential ready."
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2373
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Feb 06, 2015 2:17 pm

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 160):
I think the A343 just are right for that job. When they need replacment in 15-20 years, a used A359 should do it.

The USAF would never buy a used air frame to be used as AF1. American pride would squash that in a second. The American people would have apoplexy if an Airbus product was bought for the purpose. This is the same country that freaked out because Airbus originally won the contract for a tanker replacement (to be built in the US) and eventually that was switched to a 767 version (after several Boeing officers went to prison over the original contract). IMHO the Airbus proposal based on the A330 was a better airplane than a 30+ year old design.

Since they started the "SAM" series with the infamous SAM 26000, then came SAM-27000 (now at the Reagan Presidential Library) and SAM-28 and 29000 currently in service, I am thinking that the new birds will be SAM 30000 and SAM 31000.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Feb 06, 2015 2:49 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 205):
The USAF would never buy a used air frame to be used as AF1. American pride would squash that in a second.

The expense of tearing the plane down to the keel to allow for all the customization required to be put in will ensure that a used airframe - from any OEM - will never be used.



Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 205):
The American people would have apoplexy if an Airbus product was bought for the purpose.

I honestly doubt they'd care. Especially if the Airbus product was cheaper.



Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 205):
This is the same country that freaked out because Airbus originally won the contract for a tanker replacement (to be built in the US) and eventually that was switched to a 767 version (after several Boeing officers went to prison over the original contract).

The country didn't give a darn about who won the contract either in 2001 or in 2008. Both contract awards were overturned because of malfeasance on the part of the selection committees. If Airbus had offered a cheaper price the third time around, they would have won that one, as well. But Boeing offered the better price, so they won the business.

And for the record, the only Boeing officer who was sentenced to a prison term was CFO Michael M. Sears.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14987
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:33 pm

Quoting spectre242 (Reply 192):
Let's hope all lessons have been learned from the VH-71 fiasco... i.e. take an existing affordable airframe and turn it into an unaffordable nightmare ripe for cancellation when times get fiscally tough.

I agree with the sentiment but it's not as likely for this program. In VH-71 they made changes to the weight and thrust of the aircraft that in turn required a new tail boom to deal with the added torque which in turn required an entire flight test program had to be performed. As much as the USAF will hack away at the 748, I doubt they will go down that path. They will be adding all kinds of equipment but I doubt the a/c weight will grow beyond the current established limits. Anywhere where POTUS goes there's usually C5 and/or C17 to carry the truly heavy/bulky items.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Feb 07, 2015 10:05 pm

Quoting na (Reply 198):
Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 189):The decision to replace their 747-400 fleet with the 777-300ER is driven by the fact that ...
... late-build frames will be cheap. Odd only that within two years or even less the next Japanese "AF1" will be old type planes. Hardly appropriate for a high-tech nation ...

Why, IIRC, the two VC-25s were the last B-747-200s built.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 205):
This is the same country that freaked out because Airbus originally won the contract for a tanker replacement (to be built in the US) and eventually that was switched to a 767 version (after several Boeing officers went to prison over the original contract). IMHO the Airbus proposal based on the A330 was a better airplane than a 30+ year old design.

Oh here we go again. Get your facts right. Airbus has NEVER won the USAF tanker contest. In 2008 NG "won", but that was thrown out by the GAO (not the American People) because the USAF violated the law and showed favoritism towards NG, and gave them information they did not share with Boeing. None of that had anything to do with the 2002 KC-767 lease deal. Both the USAF and Boeing screwed that one up and USAF and Boeing people went to jail. The 2011 contest was so above boards and fair that EADS-NA did not protest it.
 
pugman211
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:55 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Feb 08, 2015 3:27 pm

Hopefully it will be the 747-8i (whatever designation it may be given), and like the current VC-25 it will look stunning.
 
AviationAddict
Posts: 634
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:37 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Feb 09, 2015 2:11 pm

Quoting queb (Reply 204):
Not a rumor:
Quoting queb (Reply 204):
to deliver up to three Boeing 747-8

"Up to three" isn't necessarily three...it could be one, or two or three...the only thing we know for sure is there won't be more than three.
 
na
Posts: 9281
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:21 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 208):
Why, IIRC, the two VC-25s were the last B-747-200s built.

Back then, the 744 was no reality, and the 742 the only possible choice. Btw, the 742 AF1s do have some significant 744 technology, like the engines.
For Japan, its different. If they would just wait another 3 years, they could get either the 778 or 779. And they could easily wait if they wanted, as their 744s surely are "low-mileage" frames. The only explanation why they ordered 77Ws is the price, there simply cant be any other important reason.
 
na
Posts: 9281
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:22 pm

Quoting AviationAddict (Reply 210):
"Up to three" isn't necessarily three...it could be one, or two or three...the only thing we know for sure is there won't be more than three.

The only thing we know is that two is the minimum.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1609
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:59 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 179):
They want new toys, and there is a reasonable argument to be made that a new airframe is warranted because of technology improvements

I suppose status could be an issue too. If the USA wants to project itself as the most powerful nation on earth (economically as well as militarily) we can hardly have our leader flying about in a 1980s bucket - shiny as it may be.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 199):
Well they will have the "mine is bigger than yours" card to play against Mexico and Korea's 787-8s.  

Although that may be a bit like comparing a station wagon to a snazzy sport's car! The station wagon is bigger - but wouldn't you rather have the sports car?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 206):
I honestly doubt they'd care. Especially if the Airbus product was cheaper.

What!? We like to wave our flag in the USA - wisely or not. There would be an uproar if the USAF bought foreign for the president's transport. And which president would want to be seeing signing off on that deal? Sending good paying American jobs overseas - OMG ordinary Americans would have a fit.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:29 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 213):
And which president would want to be seeing signing off on that deal? Sending good paying American jobs overseas - OMG ordinary Americans would have a fit.

Considering the RFP requires final assembly of the airframes to be performed in the United States, what jobs, exactly would be sent overseas?

And the VH-71 Kestrel program for the Presidential Helicopter replacement was based on a "foreign" frame - the AgustaWestland AW101 produced by Britain and Italy (with final assembly in the US) - as opposed to the "US" option, the Sikorsky VH-92.
 
flyingcello
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:31 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jun 07, 2015 9:11 pm

One the VC25 replacements, any ideas what tail numbers will be assigned? I ask only because the current aircraft break the normal rules (intentionally of course) to form a nice sequence with their predecessors...62-6000, 72-7000, 82-8000, 92-9000...do we get 102-10000 and 112-11000?
 
karadion
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:06 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jun 07, 2015 10:02 pm

Quoting Flyingcello (Reply 215):

The year the contract is awarded. So hypothetically if the USAF signs a contract with Boeing this year for 2 replacements, they will be 15-***** for each. However the USAF assigns the 5 remaining digits will be up in the air. See http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_serials/1992.html
So my guess is that they will be 15-10000 / 15-11000

[Edited 2015-06-07 15:04:39]
 
flyingcello
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:31 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jun 07, 2015 10:40 pm

Quoting Karadion (Reply 216):
The year the contract is awarded.

Yep, but that's my point. For the two current aircraft, this standard was changed. They should both have been 86- serials (I think).
 
747400sp
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:08 pm

Quoting na (Reply 211):
Back then, the 744 was no reality, and the 742 the only possible choice. Btw, the 742 AF1s do have some significant 744 technology, like the engines.

From what I understand, both VC25s were built and finshed during to Reagan era, but they had to be delayed, so they finally went into service during the original Bush era.
 
Adipasquale
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:38 pm

Does anybody have any idea if they will keep SAM 82-8000 and SAM 92-9000 around after the new (presumably SAM 29000 and SAM 30000 are put into service in the same way SAM 62-6000 and SAM 72-7000 were kept active until the early 2000s.
DH8A DH8B CR2 CR7 CR9 E45 E70 E75 E90 D95 M88 319 320 321 333 343 732 733 734 73G 738 739 752 753 762 763 77L 77W
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:13 am

Quoting adipasquale (Reply 219):
Does anybody have any idea if they will keep SAM 82-8000 and SAM 92-9000 around after the new (presumably SAM 29000 and SAM 30000 are put into service in the same way SAM 62-6000 and SAM 72-7000 were kept active until the early 2000s.

I imagine they'll be retired and quickly find new homes, most likely Obama's Presidential Library
and the USAF Museum up in Ohio
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:38 am

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 220):
I imagine they'll be retired and quickly find new homes, most likely Obama's Presidential Library and the USAF Museum up in Ohio

A 747-200 is pretty big for a presidential library, IMO. And having recently been there, I do not believe there is insufficient space in the Presidential Collection hangar at Wright-Pat.

Personally, I'd like to see one go to the Museum of Flight in Seattle (as a complement to the VC-137 we have) and the other to the UH Annex at the Smithsonian (as they could have the room).
 
zanl188
Topic Author
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:42 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 221):

I understood Presidential collection was moving to the new hangar. Not sure a 742 would even fit in the old hangar, too tall I think....
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
Buckeyetech
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 1:11 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Jun 29, 2015 12:15 pm

Since we're at least 10-15 years away from either Air Force One being permantly retired, whoever wants one still has some time before they can start collecting the funds necessary to house such a large aircraft. The NMUSAF was able to raise their funds and build the current hangar in a relatively short amount of time, I suspect they will be able to do the same again for one of these two aircraft.
B-52H, C-141C, C-5A, C-17A
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:33 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 221):
Personally, I'd like to see one go to the Museum of Flight in Seattle (as a complement to the VC-137 we have) and the other to the UH Annex at the Smithsonian (as they could have the room).

I like that idea, one west coast, the other east coast   
 
UA444
Posts: 2576
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:15 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 208):
Why, IIRC, the two VC-25s were the last B-747-200s built.

There are a few that are newer.
 
rj777
Posts: 1581
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:09 pm

So is the USAF getting 3 planes or just 2? I remember seeing something in one article saying that the 748 had been selected and that there were going to be 3 planes.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:57 pm

Quoting rj777 (Reply 226):
So is the USAF getting 3 planes or just 2? I remember seeing something in one article saying that the 748 had been selected and that there were going to be 3 planes.

Speculation was three, but until the USAF submits a final request to Congress and congress approves the final appropriation...
 
Adipasquale
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Aug 05, 2015 1:07 pm

Quoting na (Reply 211):
Back then, the 744 was no reality, and the 742 the only possible choice. Btw, the 742 AF1s do have some significant 744 technology, like the engines.

The VC-25 has CF-6-80C2B1 engines, also used on the 743. The CF-6 engines used on the 744 are the CF-6-80C2B5F
DH8A DH8B CR2 CR7 CR9 E45 E70 E75 E90 D95 M88 319 320 321 333 343 732 733 734 73G 738 739 752 753 762 763 77L 77W
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Aug 07, 2015 2:17 pm

Quoting adipasquale (Reply 228):
The VC-25 has CF-6-80C2B1 engines, also used on the 743. The CF-6 engines used on the 744 are the CF-6-80C2B5F

The CF6-80C2B1(PMC) engine, as installed at the VC25, is basically the same engine as the CF6-80C2B1F( or higher rated -B5F) engine as installed on the 744. Only the fuel control systems are different.

The VC25 engine has a conventional Main Engine Control (MEC) with digital Power Managment Control (PMC) installed.

At the 744 basically the same hardware is installed, but controlled by an Electronic Engine Control (EEC).


The advantage of the MEC + PMC controlled engine is that, if the digital supervisory control (PMC) fails in an EMP enviroment , engine control is still possible by the conventional power lever cable system.

For that reason the GEnx-2B67/P EEC, as installed at the 747-8, has already been tested for EMP resistance, as indicated by the thread starter.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Adipasquale
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:53 pm

Quoting 747classic (Reply 229):
The CF6-80C2B1(PMC) engine, as installed at the VC25, is basically the same engine as the CF6-80C2B1F( or higher rated -B5F) engine as installed on the 744. Only the fuel control systems are different.

So is the difference in the CF-6-80C2B1 as installed on the 743 that it does not have the PMC?
DH8A DH8B CR2 CR7 CR9 E45 E70 E75 E90 D95 M88 319 320 321 333 343 732 733 734 73G 738 739 752 753 762 763 77L 77W
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Aug 10, 2015 2:29 pm

All the CF6-80C series without the addition - F have a conventional fuelcontrol + PMC (digital supervisory)

All the CF6-80C2 series with -F are only controlled by an EEC. ( or also called FADEC by other manufacturers)

So, the VC25 has a conventional fuelcontrol +PMC

Consequently the VC25 engine can still be controlled by powerlever cable input with a totally failed PMC system. Only the inputs would be less accurate and probably no A/T can be used.

[Edited 2015-08-10 07:45:22]
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Adipasquale
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Mon Aug 10, 2015 3:44 pm

Quoting 747classic (Reply 231):
So, the VC25 has a conventional fuelcontrol +PMC

Consequently the VC25 engine can still be controlled by powerlever cable input with a totally failed PMC system. Only the inputs would be less accurate and probably no A/T can be used.

I understand this, I am just a little unclear on the difference between the fuel control on the VC-25 and the 743. Btw, your wealth of knowledge on the 747 is amazing!  
DH8A DH8B CR2 CR7 CR9 E45 E70 E75 E90 D95 M88 319 320 321 333 343 732 733 734 73G 738 739 752 753 762 763 77L 77W
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 8:22 am

Quoting adipasquale (Reply 232):
I am just a little unclear on the difference between the fuel control on the VC-25 and the 743.

Both VC-25 aircraft and the seven built 743 aircraft with CF6-80C2B1 engines have identical fuel controls +PMC.


Some history of the thrust control of wide body aircraft engines:

The first and second generation high bypass engines were all controlled by mechanical fuel controls
PW JT9D 3, -3A and -7 series up to -7Q a, GE CF-6-6 and -50 series, RR RB211-22, -524 series up to -524D

A sort of " in between" solution was the mechanical fuel control with an extra digital supervisory module, for more accurate pwr lever respons, added overspeed and overtemp protection
PW JT9D-7R series, GE CF6-80A series and CF6-80C2 series (without -F)

Full FADEC or EEC controlled engines
PW 4000, CF6-80C series with -F, CF6-80E series, RR RB211-524G and up series, RR Trent series, etc.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Adipasquale
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:46 pm

Quoting 747classic (Reply 233):

Thanks, that really made it all much more clear for me! Your knowledge is greatly appreciated.
DH8A DH8B CR2 CR7 CR9 E45 E70 E75 E90 D95 M88 319 320 321 333 343 732 733 734 73G 738 739 752 753 762 763 77L 77W
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22360
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 8:44 am

The new Air Force One will take a little bit longer.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...d-by-budget-deal-in-blow-to-boeing

Quote:
An order for the first Boeing Co. 747 jumbo jet for the new, upgraded Air Force One fleet to ferry U.S. presidents will be postponed by a year to fiscal 2017 under a congressional budget agreement.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 4952
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 12:22 pm

Just being curious: Apart from "It's not made here" claims - what would bar an Air Force 1 from Airbus? Are there any technical requirements that would stop that idea?


David
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23801
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:50 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 236):
Just being curious: Apart from "It's not made here" claims - what would bar an Air Force 1 from Airbus? Are there any technical requirements that would stop that idea?

As I understand it, the airframe has to be assembled within the continental US, so unless the next AF1 is an A320 family airframe (Mobile), Airbus would need to build or secure an assembly facility for any other model in their commercial range and the cost of that would be far too high for only a handful of frames.
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 3:16 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 235):
The new Air Force One will take a little bit longer.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...d-by-budget-deal-in-blow-to-boeing

Quote:
An order for the first Boeing Co. 747 jumbo jet for the new, upgraded Air Force One fleet to ferry U.S. presidents will be postponed by a year to fiscal 2017 under a congressional budget agreement.

This convinces me the new AF1 frames will be the final 747's off the line.

That would be a nice way to wrap up a program that changed commercial aviation.
 
Flighty
Posts: 8181
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 3:51 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 238):
This convinces me the new AF1 frames will be the final 747's off the line. That would be a nice way to wrap up a program that changed commercial aviation.

Agreed.
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 4952
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 3:52 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 237):

Thanks! So this would be a real hassle for Airbus. Well, the French and US governments could declare a patch of land near Toulouse as US territory, and solve it that way... well. Just a suggestion derived from military cemeteries.


David
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 2250
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 17, 2015 11:28 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 103):
That was some time ago and, as they say, things change. Depending on the exact wording of the RFP, it might be worth Airbus bidding

Since the President HAS to fly on 4 engine airplane and the A380 Might be out of Production in 2018, I think it might Not be a good bet for Airbus to propose the A380 and leave the Airplane to Boeing for the 747-8.
There are now a number of Freighters and passenger planes being sold so there are dome Examples being flown .
Should the Regs change then the 777 might be in play But that's One bog IF !! suffice to say it Won't be a B787

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 43):
It would make sense to tie an E-4 and VC-25 replacement into the same airframe and the 748 seems to be the only option. The citizens of our great nation would not be pleased if we bought an Airbus to transport the president.
As it is the 330 would have made a better, more versatile refueler than the 767 airframe (which was already a 20 year old design) but sometimes "buy American" outweighs practicality.

The A330 being proposed would have been cool had the Senators proposing the A330 NOT disallowed the B777 to be proposed and had Airbus Not sought greater compensation for the size of the A330 when the B767 would actually FIT into the same hangars that the KC135 use..
Boeing fought the selection and Won on Price when head up..
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:40 am

An unlikely but possible what if. What if the B748 is out of production before a decision is made with no white tails available?

Would we see a twin being allowed or maybe a C-17 being refitted?

Now I'm just imagining a B779 with a pair of power generating turbines added in the wing roots. :p

I know know it's very unlikely but given how much of a mess the US Federal Government is; I see a non zero chance of that happening.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2647
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:28 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 241):
Since the President HAS to fly on 4 engine airplane and the A380 Might be out of Production in 2018

president does not have to fly on 4 engines. He flys on things with less all the time.

The A380 being "out of production" wouldn't be the hurdle you would assume. It would need to be assembled in the US, and any major sub-assemblies made with secret service observation. So If Airbus wished to bid for a later date, they could and simply have the sub-assemblies be the last made, then shipped to the US for final assembly. It however is not worth thier time or money. If Boeing couldn't beat a A380 bid, they would have to be trying to lose it. Even if Airbus bid $0 for the basic frame and only charged what it cost to modify and assemble, they would be in the hundreds of millions. Its simply not worth chasing the contract.

More to the point, I don't think Boeing will make any money even on a single source bid. Way too much custom work, and deviation from mass production to have a hope of reasonable costs. They will be doing it for the political and marketing capital.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20274
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Dec 22, 2015 9:32 pm

Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 178):
That being said I'm glad the decision is on the 747-800,

There is no such aircraft is the 747-800. You might think it should be called that and I might even happen to agree (really it should have been the 747-500), but the type certificate says 747-8/8i.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 236):
Just being curious: Apart from "It's not made here" claims - what would bar an Air Force 1 from Airbus? Are there any technical requirements that would stop that idea?

I believe that a requirement is that it must be CONSTRUCTED in the U.S., irrespective of whether a U.S. firm is constructing it.

So Airbus would have to build an entire A380 FAL somewhere in the U.S. on the off chance they won the bid. For two airframes.

How likely do you think that is?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3709
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Tue Dec 22, 2015 11:33 pm

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 242):
What if the B748 is out of production before a decision is made with no white tails available?

as it has been noted many times over the last 3 years, retrofitting a whitetail is a no go.. they basically would have to not only remove and replace all the wiring, but portions of the structure would need disassembly and replacement with mission unique structure. This in not at all like a 747-8i BBJ.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 25, 2015 2:55 pm

There would be no white tails. If the production ends they would just buy the last few frames and store it until they are ready to retrofit.

And if I were to venture a guess, it will be a retrofit as congress will probably not work fast enough to provide up front money to do in-line mod.

Besides, for three frames it's more cost effective to do retrofit anyway. Remember if you do in-line mod you have to certify the frame again before you do the system integration.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
zanl188
Topic Author
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 25, 2015 4:46 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 246):
There would be no white tails. If the production ends they would just buy the last few frames and store it until they are ready to retrofit.

True. The green frames will probably be one of the lesser expenses of this acquisition.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3709
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:14 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 246):

BT, I have to disagree that a structural and wiring retrofit on a commercial white tail would be a consideration. Having worked on the first two, the amount of unique structure and wiring requirements would amount to a major effort. it would be similar to buying a Ford and converting to a Rolls. Among other things the floor structure is beefier, the self-contained air stairs require significant structure deviation, there is also talk of an elevator used in BBJ's, but the Public Relations value of the airstairs is important enough that they will not be skipped. More likely is the Air Force will pursue monies for three units with the unique portions (kind of like a long lead materials procurement), then go for the money for outfitting. ( Boeing could also foot the bill assuming the contract specified reimbursement following outfitting).
 
WIederling
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 25, 2015 8:23 pm

Quoting zanl188 (Reply 247):
True. The green frames will probably be one of the lesser expenses of this acquisition.

Will they fumble it like the Marine One replacement project ?

See, they want the Best of the Best of the Best ( ref: MIB * )
Murphy is an optimist
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bikerthai and 2 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos