Hey,

So i'm working on a project atm involving the costs associated with moving heads of states around the world and in their own places and am using the USA as an example. Everyone knows that the president travels with lots of vehicles in his motorcade and a few helicopters. Judging by the dimensions of the C-17 Globemaster III and the C-5 Galaxy, you can't fit very many of the vehicles in the plane, or many of Marine 1 for that mater. I estimate that there would be atleast 7 aircraft as a minimum when he travels, does anyone know how many cars could fit in the plane or even how many planes he would use to transport the cargo?

Also is there anyone else that transports cars and vehicles with them when they go overseas or do they just use cars from the host country? How would they make sure those cars are up to the standard of VIP required?

Thanks

I believe Queen Elizabeth II usually brings a car or two with her on official trips.

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

And the E-4 is also somewhere close, on standby. The cost of mr. Trump golfing in Florida, is said to cost 1m per weekend.

Dutchy wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

And the E-4 is also somewhere close, on standby. The cost of mr. Trump golfing in Florida, is said to cost 1m per weekend.

Wow,,,just about the same, only less than one of the former 1st lady's 's trips to Africa or the HNL vacations X 8 years.

BravoOne wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

And the E-4 is also somewhere close, on standby. The cost of mr. Trump golfing in Florida, is said to cost 1m per weekend.

Wow,,,just about the same, only less than one of the former 1st lady's 's trips to Africa or the HNL vacations X 8 years.

This isn't a debate on whether it is good or not, just about the cost.

This video explains in detail how much it costs to transport the president..
Worth a watch!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YJRqB1xtIxg

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

Only two C-17s? How many vehicles can fit inside each one? Normally a presidential motorcade has atleast around 20 vehicles in total, doesn't seem like 2 C-17s would be enough

jwoww wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

Only two C-17s? How many vehicles can fit inside each one? Normally a presidential motorcade has atleast around 20 vehicles in total, doesn't seem like 2 C-17s would be enough

Not all the vehicles have to be armoured to the level El Presidente requires, most of the motorcade vehicles will be sources locally and will be more than acceptable for the entourage.

Here is a clip from when Obama was in Berlin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T14mkSLD1rE It is easy to see how many cars are local.

Bostrom wrote:

I believe Queen Elizabeth II usually brings a car or two with her on official trips.

I don't think so, last time she was in NZ she flew commercial, same with her children and grandchildren, there's no room for her to bring a state car.

Kiwirob wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

I believe Queen Elizabeth II usually brings a car or two with her on official trips.

I don't think so, last time she was in NZ she flew commercial, same with her children and grandchildren, there's no room for her to bring a state car.

She wouldn't bring a 'state car' from the UK to New Zealand. She is, after all, the head of state of New Zealand and would be visiting as the head of the New Zealand, a completely separate role from the one she has in the UK.

jwoww wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

Only two C-17s? How many vehicles can fit inside each one? Normally a presidential motorcade has atleast around 20 vehicles in total, doesn't seem like 2 C-17s would be enough

I would imagine that a number of those 20 are vehicles used by the local diplomatic missions, hence they don't need to transport all 20. I can recognize several of those car types (Chevrolet Suburban?) as the type you usually find in use at US embassies.

BravoOne wrote:

X 8 years.

Presidential travel is expensive. One factor is the distance to the President's home. But it is a surprisingly small factor in the costs.

Every President cost more for travel than the previous president. It is simply a matter of increasing costs of consumables.

When a President travels to a set location somewhat regularly - the Secret Service and military pre-stage support elements like helicopters and cars at that location. A regular maintenance base was setup for AF-1 at Waco, TX during the Bush presidency, because the plane was there so much. A full set of vehicles stayed in Texas for over seven years.

During the last presidency, some vehicles were pre-staged in Hawaii to cut down transportation costs. Some traveled by surface instead of air because the time factor allowed the cheaper transport. The President only visited his home once a year.

The biggest factor in travel of the President, Vice-President and their wives is the Secret Service requirements. The White House only controls where the President goes, not how much goes with him.

For example - the Secret Service will often require one of their approved Presidential vehicles and the key two or three agent vehicles if traveling t
o a 'secure' country. They might require up to 20 vehicles if traveling to an unsecure country. The most expensive place to travel for many years was the USSR - because the only place they could be sure was not bugged was the Presidential Limo. So they took two.

-----

As far as total cost of travel - there is at least one aircraft which travels with AF-1 which is chartered by the US new media. Sometimes two. Usually a B-767 or 777 for overseas trips. There is at least one B-737 advance aircraft which arrives a couple days before the visit, and other G-IV which arrives a couple hours before AF-1, and possibly another of each. That would be for a major overseas visit.

One big cost for domestic trips is that commercial seats are not usually available for staff who don't fly on AF-1, so a B-737 moves extra staff to Palm Beach, some weekends it is a G-IV type aircraft.

jmt18325 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

I believe Queen Elizabeth II usually brings a car or two with her on official trips.

I don't think so, last time she was in NZ she flew commercial, same with her children and grandchildren, there's no room for her to bring a state car.

She wouldn't bring a 'state car' from the UK to New Zealand. She is, after all, the head of state of New Zealand and would be visiting as the head of the New Zealand, a completely separate role from the one she has in the UK.

No shit, really, I know very well what her role is in NZ. The last time she visited with on Britianna she had a vehicle with her which was used in NZ.

jmt18325 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

I believe Queen Elizabeth II usually brings a car or two with her on official trips.

I don't think so, last time she was in NZ she flew commercial, same with her children and grandchildren, there's no room for her to bring a state car.

She wouldn't bring a 'state car' from the UK to New Zealand. She is, after all, the head of state of New Zealand and would be visiting as the head of the New Zealand, a completely separate role from the one she has in the UK.

No shit, really, I know very well what her role is in NZ. The last time she visited with on Britianna she had a vehicle with her which was used in NZ.

Kiwirob wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

I believe Queen Elizabeth II usually brings a car or two with her on official trips.

I don't think so, last time she was in NZ she flew commercial, same with her children and grandchildren, there's no room for her to bring a state car.

I think she did when she was in Germany in 2015, it looks like the Bentley state limousine. https://youtu.be/yzVkWxpJtrM?t=8m40s

Kiwirob wrote:

No shit, really, I know very well what her role is in NZ. The last time she visited with on Britianna she had a vehicle with her which was used in NZ.

That's very unusual for her to bring her own car. Usually her country that she is in provides everything.

jwoww wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

Only two C-17s? How many vehicles can fit inside each one? Normally a presidential motorcade has atleast around 20 vehicles in total, doesn't seem like 2 C-17s would be enough

Would it not be easier and more economical to use an actual freight aircraft like the 747F, surely that would be able to fit more vehicles in it than taking all the C-17s and would make more sense?

jwoww wrote:

jwoww wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I saw a documentary on the VC-25 and it covered President Obama's trip to Kenya. Both VC-25s accompanied him and, as I recall, two C-17s carried the State Car and the Suburbans used by the Secret Service.

Only two C-17s? How many vehicles can fit inside each one? Normally a presidential motorcade has atleast around 20 vehicles in total, doesn't seem like 2 C-17s would be enough

Would it not be easier and more economical to use an actual freight aircraft like the 747F, surely that would be able to fit more vehicles in it than taking all the C-17s and would make more sense?

I wouldn't like to see the attempts made to load the Beast into a 747!

Using a C-17 also means they can get the hell out of wherever faster. A freighter like a 744F would need lifts and non-USAF personnel involved.

A Google search will provide images of motorcade vehicles being loaded onto Kalitta 747 for Obama's visit to Africa.

jwoww wrote:

Would it not be easier and more economical to use an actual freight aircraft like the 747F, surely that would be able to fit more vehicles in it than taking all the C-17s and would make more sense?

The C17 is a "freight aircraft".

jwoww wrote:

Would it not be easier and more economical to use an actual freight aircraft like the 747F, surely that would be able to fit more vehicles in it than taking all the C-17s and would make more sense?

No. A commercial chartered freighter is not going to be cheaper.

It may have to sit on the ground for several days at the destination, or move according to a presidential schedule. The commercial charter company is also not going to want to be responsible for having an alternate/ backup aircraft within one to six hours notice should the primary aircraft go down for a maintenance reason.

The US military aircraft travels under diplomatic immunity/ clearance rules - that would not be the case for a commercial chartered aircraft.

As mentioned above - at times commercial chartered (US Flag carriers only with US citizen only crews with security clearances) are used to transport support vehicles, but never to transport the presidential vehicles.

The high cost is not the Presidential travel - his aircraft, his ground transport.

It is the support and security transport which raises the costs so much, and creates a full circus of aircraft, vehicles and personnel.

Let's be honest here - the US President, his wife(or husband), and his family is the number one high priority terrorist target in the world.

Killing, or even better, capturing alive the US president, would be the ultimate terrorist accomplishment in history.

rfields5421 wrote:

jwoww wrote:

Would it not be easier and more economical to use an actual freight aircraft like the 747F, surely that would be able to fit more vehicles in it than taking all the C-17s and would make more sense?

No. A commercial chartered freighter is not going to be cheaper.

It may have to sit on the ground for several days at the destination, or move according to a presidential schedule. The commercial charter company is also not going to want to be responsible for having an alternate/ backup aircraft within one to six hours notice should the primary aircraft go down for a maintenance reason.

The US military aircraft travels under diplomatic immunity/ clearance rules - that would not be the case for a commercial chartered aircraft.

As mentioned above - at times commercial chartered (US Flag carriers only with US citizen only crews with security clearances) are used to transport support vehicles, but never to transport the presidential vehicles.

The high cost is not the Presidential travel - his aircraft, his ground transport.

It is the support and security transport which raises the costs so much, and creates a full circus of aircraft, vehicles and personnel.

Let's be honest here - the US President, his wife(or husband), and his family is the number one high priority terrorist target in the world.

Killing, or even better, capturing alive the US president, would be the ultimate terrorist accomplishment in history.

I'm sure they could just buy one or two of the freighter aircrafts, (maybe the 747-8F seeing as they're using the 747-8I for Air Force One) and it would still probably save them money and they wouldn't really have the problem of having an aircraft sitting around costing money.

Each mission for the US President is different. He does not travel with both 747's and an E4 and multiple C-17's on domestic trips. Often only a C-17 arrives the day before with the vehicles and certain Secret Service Staff members, then departs later the same day or the next day, all depending. Used to be a C-141. Yes, the press has a charter 767 or 777.

International is a whole different can of worms.

All cost a lot of money.

The Government Accountability Office does detailed cost analyses of past presidential trips when requested to do so by Congress. You can find some of these using this search result:
https://www.google.com/#q=presidential+ ... e:.gao.gov

I think these are going to be about the best source you could find for the details you're asking about.

jman wrote:

[q

I'm sure they could just buy one or two of the freighter aircrafts, (maybe the 747-8F seeing as they're using the 747-8I for Air Force One) and it would still probably save them money and they wouldn't really have the problem of having an aircraft sitting around costing money.

What is wrong with the C17s they are using? They already have them, they work well, and handle vehicles better than a 748F.

johns624 wrote:

jman wrote:

[q

I'm sure they could just buy one or two of the freighter aircrafts, (maybe the 747-8F seeing as they're using the 747-8I for Air Force One) and it would still probably save them money and they wouldn't really have the problem of having an aircraft sitting around costing money.

What is wrong with the C17s they are using? They already have them, they work well, and handle vehicles better than a 748F.

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with them, just questioning whether it would be more economical to take the 7478f which could hold more vehicles than taking as many C-17s as they sometimes do because sometimes i've seen pictures where there are atleast 5 of them and theoretically one 7478f could fit as much as two C-17s.

jman wrote:

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with them, just questioning whether it would be more economical to take the 7478f which could hold more vehicles than taking as many C-17s as they sometimes do because sometimes i've seen pictures where there are atleast 5 of them and theoretically one 7478f could fit as much as two C-17s.

How are you going to offload vehicles from a 748?

johns624 wrote:

jman wrote:

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with them, just questioning whether it would be more economical to take the 7478f which could hold more vehicles than taking as many C-17s as they sometimes do because sometimes i've seen pictures where there are atleast 5 of them and theoretically one 7478f could fit as much as two C-17s.

How are you going to offload vehicles from a 748?

Carry a freight loader on a C-17?

Stitch wrote:

johns624 wrote:

jman wrote:

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with them, just questioning whether it would be more economical to take the 7478f which could hold more vehicles than taking as many C-17s as they sometimes do because sometimes i've seen pictures where there are atleast 5 of them and theoretically one 7478f could fit as much as two C-17s.

How are you going to offload vehicles from a 748?

Carry a freight loader on a C-17?

Stitch... did Boeing stop using a self contained cargo loader with the conversion to the 747-8F? (I've searched Google but can not find pictures of it.. saw a video of one that unfolds like a preying mantis.. I'll keep looking)

found it. https://www.slideshare.net/1st_TSG_Airb ... -nose-ramp go to slide 6 and on I know it's an old presentation (especially showing an Iraqi freighter) however I thought they went into production for use in airports without the high lift loaders.

The Boeing Onboard Loader was an option for the 747-200 Convertible and only the two frames ordered by Iraqi Airways were equipped with it.

johns624 wrote:

jman wrote:

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with them, just questioning whether it would be more economical to take the 7478f which could hold more vehicles than taking as many C-17s as they sometimes do because sometimes i've seen pictures where there are atleast 5 of them and theoretically one 7478f could fit as much as two C-17s.

How are you going to offload vehicles from a 748?

Considering the modifications that would go into making a plane suitable to be Air Force One, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think they could make a cargo ramp at the back of a freight plane, just like the ramp in the Air Force One movie had (albeit a fake one)

thanks Stitch

jman wrote:

Considering the modifications that would go into making a plane suitable to be Air Force One, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think they could make a cargo ramp at the back of a freight plane, just like the ramp in the Air Force One movie had (albeit a fake one)

You just don't "add a ramp". You'd have to reengineer the whole airframe. The C17 is designed to carry vehicles. What part of that don't you understand?
PS--Movies aren't real. They have artistic license. When you become an adult, you'll realize that.

johns624 wrote:

jman wrote:

Considering the modifications that would go into making a plane suitable to be Air Force One, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think they could make a cargo ramp at the back of a freight plane, just like the ramp in the Air Force One movie had (albeit a fake one)

You just don't "add a ramp". You'd have to reengineer the whole airframe. The C17 is designed to carry vehicles. What part of that don't you understand?
PS--Movies aren't real. They have artistic license. When you become an adult, you'll realize that.

Calm down a bit there buddy. Considering that they have modified the cargo door to have stairs and offer an alternative entrance to AFO, it wouldn't be too far out of the realm of ideas to add the ramp at the back, or even the front with the nose that opens up.

PPS- I am an adult thank you very much. I understand movies aren't real, I did study Film and Television in high school. Ideas have to come from somewhere in the world, it isn't unrealistic to ge tan idea from a movie and find a way to make it work.

jman wrote:

johns624 wrote:

jman wrote:

[q

I'm sure they could just buy one or two of the freighter aircrafts, (maybe the 747-8F seeing as they're using the 747-8I for Air Force One) and it would still probably save them money and they wouldn't really have the problem of having an aircraft sitting around costing money.

What is wrong with the C17s they are using? They already have them, they work well, and handle vehicles better than a 748F.

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with them, just questioning whether it would be more economical to take the 7478f which could hold more vehicles than taking as many C-17s as they sometimes do because sometimes i've seen pictures where there are atleast 5 of them and theoretically one 7478f could fit as much as two C-17s.

If the Air Force need something bigger than a C-17, they still have C-5s. Easy roll-on-roll off,and room for pax upstairs.

jman wrote:

Considering that they have modified the cargo door to have stairs and offer an alternative entrance to AFO, it wouldn't be too far out of the realm of ideas to add the ramp at the back, or even the front with the nose that opens up.

No it is not going to be cheaper than using a C-17 or C-5 if extra space is needed.

You are talking about adding two extra special build airframes. A new set of maintenance requirements, personnel and logistics.

Vs - using an exist aircraft, part of a fleet of over 220 aircraft.

While the aircraft sitting during a presidential trip does take a C-17 or two out of the normal fleet, using the C-17 does not add costs by having dedicated aircraft sitting at Andrews or another base idle for the hundreds of days a year the President is in DC.

All this talk 'bout the Beast and support vehicles in a 747 is great, but you are forgetting something else that is very often also part of the circus involved when a Presidential visit is being made.

It's green, has four main rotor blades, and never travels alone...

studedave wrote:

:idea:

All this talk 'bout the Beast and support vehicles in a 747 is great, but you are forgetting something else that is very often also part of the circus involved when a Presidential visit is being made.

It's green, has four main rotor blades, and never travels alone...

would the helicopter not be able to fit in a 747?

Doesn't the Saudi King transport his vehicles and an escalator on a 747F when he travels overseas?

jman wrote:

would the helicopter not be able to fit in a 747?

A Sea King or a Blackhawk is not transportable in a 747. The 747's nose door can only take loads up to 2m tall, and a UH-60 when folded is close to 4m tall. In contrast, a C-17's cargo door can take loads exceeding 4m tall, with a limitation that the load must be under 3.96m under the wing box.

At least, they would need to be disassembled to fit, with the rotor blades and rotor head removed. Actually, from the looks of it, you will probably will need to remove the landing gear, the engines, transmission, and tail boom as well and you might still have issues with clearance.

Not to mention that it will probably take a maintenance crew working round the clock for almost a week to put a helicopter back together and flight test everything every time you do it, assuming all of the parts, tools and equipment on on hand...

So yeah, a non-starter.

jman wrote:

Doesn't the Saudi King transport his vehicles and an escalator on a 747F when he travels overseas?

It was reported that on a trip to Indonesia, the entire baggage train for the Saudi King and his entourage of over 1,500 people consisted of two Boeing 747's, two 777s, one 757 and two 737-800 passenger jets, with a C-130 close behind.

jman wrote:

would the helicopter not be able to fit in a 747?

Helicopters. At least 2, sometimes more.

No, the VH-60 and VH-3 will not fit in a 747. Nor will the VH-92, when it takes over for the -60s and -3s.
An S-76 requires significant disassembly to fit in a 747 (and still won't go through the nose IIRC), and a -76 is much smaller than all of the above 3 helicopters.