• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 5160
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 25, 2015 8:46 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 244):
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.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 237):
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.

Can Airbus or the EU get this to the WTO? Large government contracts must be placed the open market, and the prerequisite that the plane be built on U.S. soil only serves to exclude foreign competitors. It won't affect the mission or the capabilities of Air Force 1 in any way.


David
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Dec 25, 2015 9:18 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 250):
It won't affect the mission or the capabilities of Air Force 1 in any way.

The logic behind this mentality is that if a foreign supplier disagrees with a policy of the US they could withhold critical supplies as a form of extortion.
Pilots are idiots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 5160
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Dec 26, 2015 12:03 am

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 251):
The logic behind this mentality is that if a foreign supplier disagrees with a policy of the US they could withhold critical supplies as a form of extortion.

This is funny that the USA fears extortion when they have the necessary engineers and industries to rebuild foreign aircraft parts. And as AF1 is a military aircraft, you don't need the usual aircraft part documentation to begin with... and most head of states fly on Böings, Airbii, Dassaults and Embraers, and are thus dependent on the suppliers.


David
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1285
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:29 am

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 250):
Can Airbus or the EU get this to the WTO? Large government contracts must be placed the open market, and the prerequisite that the plane be built on U.S. soil only serves to exclude foreign competitors. It won't affect the mission or the capabilities of Air Force 1 in any way.

I read about the F-35 being assembled in Japan and I'm not sure I follow the logic.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 14778
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:18 am

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 251):
The logic behind this mentality is that if a foreign supplier disagrees with a policy of the US they could withhold critical supplies as a form of extortion.

If that were really the case, the US military would never buy non-US weapons systems.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:18 pm

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 251):

Like France and the ships they were building for Russia
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:24 pm

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 251):
The logic behind this mentality is that if a foreign supplier disagrees with a policy of the US they could withhold critical supplies as a form of extortion.

I believe the actual reason is for security reasons to ensure the integrity of the airframe and to prevent the installation of surveillance devices (i.e. - the US Embassy in Moscow).

Also, does the WTO requirements apply to military applications, which this falls under? I am guessing it does not.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Dec 30, 2015 10:55 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 248):
Having worked on the first two, the amount of unique structure and wiring requirements would amount to a major effort

I agree that the mod effort would be extensive. My point was that for three frames, BCA will not want to invest Engineering's assets to incorporate the mod in-line. You do not get to take advantage of all of production systems like corective actions incorporation.

I believe the decision has already been made for retrofit. So what ever mod that needs to be done, it will be done by BDS and Engineering will not be done in PDM.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 31, 2015 2:11 am

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 257):

you could be correct.... and maybe the answer is somewhere in between a full blown mod and a in-sequence variation for structural stuff.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 31, 2015 6:55 am

Some detailed info about the current active 747's used by the USAF :


Both VC-25A aircraft are built according the standard master drawings with basic number block R1001- R1267 for the all pax 747-200B/300 series.

Actual basic numbers used are R1251 and R1254

The customer options are listed in the variable number block RD166 and RD167 and all off standard deviations are FAA certified with several STC's.
Note : the aerial refuelling is not FAA certified.

Almost all special modifications were completed in a special hangar and took 3 years to complete.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The four 747- E4A/B aircraft are built according dedicated master drawings in the unique basic number block R1901- R1902 (PW powered) and R1904-R1905 (GE powered).

All further customer options are listed in the variable number block RB013-RB016

The aircraft are only military certified and were special built airframes, after roll-out equiped with ex EC-135J National Emergency Airborne Command Post (NEACP) interim communications equipment. The third and fourth aircraft were built with other engines (CF6-50E) and a 8 generator electrical system. The last built aircraft was a further modified E4B, with the all final equipment installed.

All aircraft were assembled at the standard FAL and system equiped by E systems (Raytheon Intelligence and Information Systems)

All aircraft were later modified to full E-4B standard

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aircraft data ( L/N, C/N, Type, Roll out, F/F, Delivery date, Basic number, Variable number, Operator) :

VC-25A

679---23824--B747-2G4B---87-04-16----87-05-16----90-08-23-----R1251------RD166----USAF
685---23825--B747-2G4B---87-07-10----87-10-29----90-12-20-----R1254------RD167----USAF


E4

202---20682--B747-E4A----73-1676----73-06-13-----73-07-16-----R1901----- RB013----USAF
204---20683--B747-E4A----73-1677----73-09-11-----73-10-03-----R1902------RB014----USAF
232---20684--B747-E4A----74-0787----74-06-06-----74-10-15-----R1904------RB015----USAF
257---20949--B747-E4B----75-0125----75-04-29-----75-08-04-----R1905------RB016----USAF

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seen all above, most probably the new Air Force One will be assembled at the standard 747-8 FAL and later modified.

Remarks :
- most of the structural modification are already engineered for the VC-25A, e.g. modified doors and "on board " stairs, aerial refuelling etc.
- most time consuming will be the integration of the -new-communication equipment
- also time consuming will be the software adaption and certification for the modified fuel and electrical systems. (or will this be a three man cockpit)

[Edited 2015-12-30 23:50:53]
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Buckeyetech
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 1:11 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Thu Dec 31, 2015 4:05 pm

Interesting is when they decommission the current VC-25s. That will be an unprecedented amount of work removing the classified components in preparation for public display. The USAF Museum will have an easier time since their restoration facility is in a restricted area on base, and a stone throws away from the actual public museum.
B-52H, C-141C, C-5A, C-17A
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Jan 01, 2016 6:05 am

Quoting 747classic (Reply 259):
- most of the structural modification are already engineered for the VC-25A, e.g. modified doors and "on board " stairs, aerial refuelling etc.

The design concept may be copied, but the engineering would probably not be re-used.

For the -8 many part numbers of major components would have rolled, which would result in requiring new retrofits anyway.

Not sure if they will keep the internal part numbering system or would they genrate a new base system. That would also influence the engineering.

Manufacturing techniques have come a long way. Not sure if you want to use an old design when a newer design is better and cheaper and you can actually find someone who know how to make it 

But most important would be the current availavility of a digigital frame. While I am not sure how much of the -8 has been digitized, the fact that much have been, would also mean that a new (or copied) digital design based on the existing CATIA data would reduce protential integration problems that kanban is concerned about.


Bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Jan 01, 2016 1:28 pm

All " special parts " for the VC-25A aircraft are indeed designed according the old analoque design system and have to be made digital.

In the late nineties the 744 drawings were converted into a digital format (Catia ) and the assemly process was modified.

See : http://molucad.com/media/publications/DMS-2.pdf

Also the Basic numbers and Variable numbers were using a new starting point, while the engine type indicators were deleted at the same time.

The new system was introduced from L/N 1145 , B747-409, C/N 29030, Delivered at February 25 1998.

The 747-8 is AFAIK 100% digital. (Indirect via the 744 or designed new, special for the 748)

[Edited 2016-01-01 06:23:40]
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:45 am

Quoting 747classic (Reply 262):
The 747-8 is AFAIK 100% digital.

If that is the case, then it would be most cost effective to generate new retrofit designs directly as digital data. Even if you are just copying the design. I susspect finite element modeling also have come a long way since then, you can optimize the smallest details if you want to save weight.

Bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 02, 2016 4:32 am

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 263):

and sometimes they just build blank parts and back drill..
 
UA444
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Jan 08, 2016 12:55 am

Would the new AF1s be 747-8G4? Is that code still used?
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 25572
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Fri Jan 29, 2016 10:52 pm

I just came across this news bulletin:

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDispla...ntract-for-next-air-force-one.aspx

Quote:
The Boeing Company was awarded a contract Jan. 29 for risk reduction activities for the Presidential Aircraft Recapitalization program, which will field the next Air Force One.

This is the first contract the Air Force has awarded for this program. Additional modifications will be made to this contract in the future to purchase the commercial 747-8 aircraft, as well as to design, modify and test those aircraft to meet the presidential mission.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Joshu
Screener
Posts: 444
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:05 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:01 am

Did I miss where it said how many they will be ordering?
Washington-Baltimore Spotters Group
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:06 am

Quoting Joshu (Reply 267):

the reports are design work for two airframes.. that doesn't necessarily eliminate a third unit.
 
MadameConcorde
Posts: 9231
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:08 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:07 pm

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 19):

Reply 19, posted Sat Jun 7 2014 21:18:29 your local time (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

I would like to see a B747-8i as the new Air Force One.

It would make an awesome looking airplane!
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 266):

This is the first contract the Air Force has awarded for this program. Additional modifications will be made to this contract in the future to purchase the commercial 747-8 aircraft, as well as to design, modify and test those aircraft to meet the presidential mission.

I knew it!!!!

  

Air Force Awards Boeing Contract For Next Air Force One
January 29, 2016 Anthony Ribeiro 1 Comment 747, Air Force, Boeing, Military

WASHINGTON — The Boeing Company was awarded a contract Jan. 29 for the Presidential Aircraft Recapitalization program, which will field the next Air Force One.

-50%
read more here
http://avgeeknews.com/air-force-awar...g-contract-for-next-air-force-one/

The new Air Force One B747-8i will be a sight to behold!

A true class act!

        
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
 
flyDTW1992
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:04 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:18 pm

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 269):
The new Air Force One B747-8i will be a sight to behold!

A true class act!

Just as long as they replace that awful '60s-era livery the current ones have...      
Now you're flying smart
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:08 pm

Quoting FrmrKSEngr (Reply 57):
Tubes do not like vibration, not ideal for airplane application. The reliability issues introduced by tubes would far outweigh any additional EMP benefit over the aircraft EMP shielding.

And yet over the years countless tube radio sets have survived combat in aircraft in WWII, Korea even Vietnam.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 194):
And how many 747's were operated by US carriers has no relevance to the issue at all.

Actually it does, since there are few airframes that can be scraped for parts to service the remaining aircraft. That is where the USAF got lucky with the similarities of the KC-135 to the 707/720. Look at photos D-M in the 1980's lots of 707 frames being scrapped to provide parts to keep those KC's and E3's flying.

If you don't have the parts you either have to spend a lot of money to make them, or you can't fly the plane.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:23 am

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 270):
Just as long as they replace that awful '60s-era livery the current ones have.

and you have some designs to be considered... ?

Quoting L-188 (Reply 271):
Actually it does, since there are few airframes that can be scraped for parts to service the remaining aircraft. That is where the USAF got lucky with the similarities of the KC-135 to the 707/720. Look at photos D-M in the 1980's lots of 707 frames being scrapped to provide parts to keep those KC's and E3's flying.

as far as AF! goes reconditioned commercial parts are seldom used and sufficient stores of replaceable parts are maintained.. non standard and non spareable stuff of course must be made on demand.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:16 am

I still think the biggest threat to the new AF1 will be the US Air Force, White House, or US Congress trying to make it do too much right from the start. I hope for the US taxpayer that the leadership clearly writes down what is needed for the aircraft's IOC and then over time put in all the nice to haves.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1285
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:32 pm

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 270):
Just as long as they replace that awful '60s-era livery the current ones have...

I'm thinking a giant screaming eagle on the front with "USA! USA!" on the rear of the fuselage. Also, the engines should be shiny gold.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20592
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 8:34 pm

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 270):

Just as long as they replace that awful '60s-era livery the current ones have...      

I agree. I think the current AF-1 livery is very anachronistic and doesn't represent the U.S. well.

What do you suggest? I don't think that a white aircraft with "United States of America" and a simple flag on the tail is adequate.
-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
DocLightning
Posts: 20592
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 8:37 pm

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 274):

I'm thinking a giant screaming eagle on the front with "USA! USA!" on the rear of the fuselage. Also, the engines should be shiny gold.
https://fortunedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/gettyimages-163519629.jpg?quality=80&w=1024

How about this livery?   
-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
Devilfish
Posts: 5715
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 9:40 pm

More information here.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ract-of-air-force-one-reca-421423/

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 270):
Just as long as they replace that awful '60s-era livery the current ones have...

Doubt it.....


https://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?itemid=65661

http://avgeeknews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/a1-800x445.jpg
http://avgeeknews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/a1-800x445.jpg

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 276):
How about this livery?

I think that would go to the Trump'eter' from Alaska.....   
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Sun Jan 31, 2016 9:48 pm

lol I wonder what President Trump will do with his 752 when the USAF and American people present him with a shiny new 748?

 
Sooner787
Posts: 1989
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:11 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 278):

lol I wonder what President Trump will do with his 752 when the USAF and American people present him with a shiny new 748?

The family can use it for weekends to West Palm beach.

Save the taxpayers money not using AF2 and the other smaller jets
in the Presidential air wing   
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:56 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 279):
The family can use it for weekends to West Palm beach.

Save the taxpayers money not using AF2 and the other smaller jets in the Presidential air wing

I'm not sure the Secret Service (who make the rules) would go along with that.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Feb 03, 2016 10:53 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 279):

Save the taxpayers money not using AF2 and the other smaller jets

Why would the Vice President be going to West Palm? Did you mean the C-32 or C-40?
Pilots are idiots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread

Wed Feb 10, 2016 2:17 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 271):

If you don't have the parts you either have to spend a lot of money to make them, or you can't fly the plane.

I do not think the cost of parts is an issue for keeping AF1 flying, and I also do not believe that the Air Force would even consider for a moment using used parts on AF1. It is not being used on military missions like the KC135, where losses are basically expected. This is the last plane in the entire Air Force that they want to have a problem with.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1989
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Wed Feb 10, 2016 4:20 pm

Apologies if this has been asked already, but willl a 748I
fit inside the current VC-25 hangar at Andrews or will they
need to expand the hangar ?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:46 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 1):
Apologies if this has been asked already, but willl a 748I fit inside the current VC-25 hangar at Andrews or will they need to expand the hangar ?

The hangar should be large enough, I believe.
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1566
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:15 am

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 1):
Apologies if this has been asked already, but willl a 748I
fit inside the current VC-25 hangar at Andrews or will they
need to expand the hangar ?

You could fit two of them in there.
Anon
 
flyDTW1992
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:04 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:23 am

I wonder, since it's very much a derivative of the current aircraft, will it be called VC-25C, or VC-25E, etc.? A la Super Hornet, C-130J, and so forth.
Now you're flying smart
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:35 am

I'd put money on wither VC-25B as the current one's are VC-25A's; or VC-25I as it's a derivative of the B747-8I
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 2020
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:22 pm

But they could have had a VC-8! Sorry, had to do it.  

IMO, I think it will get it's own designation. I have nothing to base this on, it's just a guess.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
User avatar
AviationAddict
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:37 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:50 pm

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 6):
IMO, I think it will get it's own designation. I have nothing to base this on, it's just a guess

Using the C-20 & C-37 as a basis I'd say it could go either way.

Taking size out of the equation the differences between the B744 and B748 are similar to the differences between the G-III and G-IV (different engines, upgrades avionics, etc.) and both Gulfstream models were given the C-20 designation.

On the other hand, the B748 is longer and has an enlarged upper deck when compared to a B744, which would make it similar to a G-V when compared to a G-IV. The G-V got a totally new designation in C-37.

I'd say it's 50/50 at this point.

Side question, who or, what group, actually makes the determination on what to designate a new aircraft?
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6609
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Mon Feb 15, 2016 2:39 am

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 6):
But they could have had a VC-8!

Nah, I don't think the C-8 will ever make it to become a VC-8 and AF1


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Richard Werno



The Brazilian Air Force has, however, produce a nice VIP version of the C-8....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ricardo Hebmuller



.... but I'm not sure the US president will accept it without substantial upgrades. At least the First Lady might request a different seat color.

[Edited 2016-02-14 18:51:57]
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 2589
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Mon Feb 15, 2016 4:28 am

Quoting AviationAddict (Reply 7):
Taking size out of the equation the differences between the B744 and B748 are similar to the differences between the G-III and G-IV (different engines, upgrades avionics, etc.) and both Gulfstream models were given the C-20 designation.

Remember, we're not talking about a B744 but a B742 and the differences between that and a B748 are a little more dramatic. The Japanese got the B744 for government VIP travel.
 
User avatar
AviationAddict
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:37 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Mon Feb 15, 2016 1:56 pm

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 9):
Remember, we're not talking about a B744 but a B742 and the differences between that and a B748 are a little more dramatic. The Japanese got the B744 for government VIP travel.

That's true, I'm not sure what I was thinking when I typed B744.

When this question was first posed I immediately guess it would end being VC-25C or some other variation of the current designation but now I'm starting to lean more towards a totally new designation. The current VC-25s will probably remain in service for at least a short period of time after the -8s come online and I suspect both the USAF and the secret service would prefer separate designations to cut down on any possible confusion - if both types are out doing missions and one has an issue I would think they'd want to know which one it is immediately and having both named VC-25s could cause problems. We're not talking fighters here, there's more at stake.

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 4):
or VC-25I as it's a derivative of the B747-8I

The current US designation system avoids the use of I and O for suffixes to avoid confusion with the numbers one and zero.
 
User avatar
larshjort
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:54 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:04 pm

Quoting AviationAddict (Reply 7):

Taking size out of the equation the differences between the B744 and B748 are similar to the differences between the G-III and G-IV (different engines, upgrades avionics, etc.) and both Gulfstream models were given the C-20 designation.

The 747-400 got the C-33 designation

Quoting AviationAddict (Reply 7):
Taking size out of the equation the differences between the B744 and B748 are similar to the differences between the G-III and G-IV (different engines, upgrades avionics, etc.) and both Gulfstream models were given the C-20 designation.

On the other hand, the B748 is longer and has an enlarged upper deck when compared to a B744, which would make it similar to a G-V when compared to a G-IV. The G-V got a totally new designation in C-37.

You've got the following cargo designations for the various 747 variants:
C-19 - 747-100
VC-25 - 747-200 hybrid
C-33 - 747-400

Following this system I sat it is a fair chance that the 747-8 will recieve a new number.
139, 306, 319, 320, 321, 332, 34A, AN2, AT4, AT5, AT7, 733, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 146, AR1, BH2, CN1, CR2, DH1, DH3, DH4,
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1989
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:32 pm

Quoting larshjort (Reply 11):
Following this system I sat it is a fair chance that the 747-8 will recieve a new number.

VC-48 has a nice ring to it   
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Wed Feb 24, 2016 7:36 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 12):
VC-48 has a nice ring to it

Which would work too, given the new tanker has the C-46 designation, this new airframe could end up as a C-48.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
tjh8402
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:06 am

Quoting Moose135 (Reply 13):
Which would work too, given the new tanker has the C-46 designation, this new airframe could end up as a C-48.

I notice y'all are skipping C-47. Think the USAF holds that in sufficient reverence that it's been officially retired? (recall that there was a previous C-46).
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Thu Feb 25, 2016 2:41 am

is it a duller week in the sticks than usual... what they will number it is years away and probably the least important item available for discussion.. why don't we concentrate on how may of the normal 747-8i passenger windows will be blocked, or whether they will include a tarmac to mid deck elevator..
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Thu Feb 25, 2016 2:17 pm

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 14):

I notice y'all are skipping C-47

Another time, another place?

The C-47 was the Sky Train. But that was before the Air Force was created . . .

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 14):
Think the USAF holds that in sufficient reverence

The USAF may not but the general public may . . . I do not believe any President would want to tread upon the memories of D-DAY and Band of Brothers . . .

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
AviationAddict
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:37 am

RE: Air Force One Replacement Thread Pt2

Thu Feb 25, 2016 6:26 pm

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 14):
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 16):

Both the C-46 and C-47 were designated prior to (and largely retired before) the introduction of the consolidated Tri-Service system in 1962. It is possible the USAF could skip the C-47 simply because of the history of the previous model but, in most cases designations are only skipped to avoid confusion with another type that is already in service or was recently retired. I think if they were to skip the C-47 their reasoning would be more to do with avoiding confusion with the Army CH-47 more so than an homage to the Douglas C-47.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 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