777-300ER Air Force One

[Mike777 163]

 

 

Marine One (current VHX-60 White Hawk... so funny that they renamed the Black Hawk on several levels) has two engines.

 

Is it not the case that one engine operates each rotor and that if one of them failed the 'copter would start spinning in the opposite direction of the remaining rotor?  Single engine failure on a 777 would not, of course, be catastrophic.

 

 

 

The USAF almost ended up with A330 tankers a little while back: http://en.wikipedia....p_Grumman_KC-45

 

One of Obama's chiefs of staff is a former Boeing executive, so never was too likely once the bidding was reopened.  Airbus is soon to build A320s in Mobile, Alabama, where the tanker was supposed to be built.

 

Mike

[MarkW 1,490]

Marine One (current VHX-60 White Hawk... so funny that they renamed the Black Hawk on several levels) has two engines.

 

 

 

Thanks for the clarification !

[KriVa 307]

Is it not the case that one engine operates each rotor and that if one of them failed the 'copter would start spinning in the opposite direction of the remaining rotor?  Single engine failure on a 777 would not, of course, be catastrophic.

 

No, it's not.

The White Hawk should be the same in term of gearboxes as a "normal" Black Hawk. In this case, the two engines are connected to a gearbox, which in turn connects to an assembly that drives both the main rotor and the tail rotor.

There's also a clutch between the engines and the gearbox. In case one engine fails, it simply doesn't provide any power anymore, but the other engine does not have to "drive" that engine, so all the remaining power goes to the rotors, not wasting it on driving a dead engine.

In any case, when one engine fails in a helicopter, you'll want to be going down FAST. Especially when you have POTUS in the back of your aircraft.

Helicopters are kept aloft through a very delicate set of forces cancelling each other out. When an engine fails, the safest place to look for is a decent landing spot.

 

Disclaimer: the "Should be" part of the first sentence refers to the rather limited public knowledge about the actual vehicles POTUS uses. Though they are derivatives of the more common models, many things will have been customised. A lot of the mechanics will have remained the same, though.

[Mike777 163]

 

 

The White Hawk should be the same in term of gearboxes as a "normal" Black Hawk. In this case, the two engines are connected to a gearbox, which in turn connects to an assembly that drives both the main rotor and the tail rotor.

 

Thomas, thanks for the clarification.  Good to know that each engine is capable of powering both rotors independently, at least for some period of time.  Also want to note that I looked at the configuration of the Black Hawk and now see that it has a main and tail rotor, not two main rotors as I wrongly assumed.

 

Mike

[KriVa 307]

You were thinking of the Chinook helicopter, which does have two main rotors and two main engines.

However, the same principle applies to that helicopter too. Two main engines, connected through a set of gearboxes to two rotors. When one engine fails, the other drives the rotors by itself. Whether or not you'll be able to fly, or just do a controlled landing, depends on the load you're carrying. In general, though, the principle is the same. It's not like one engine drives one single rotor.

[mcbellette 145]

Well, sure.

 

But on the other hand when you consider the fact that I'm pretending to fly a 750,000lb airplane around in my bathrobe, my imaginary POTUS 'settling' for a 777-300ER is probably not too big of a leap.

 

Are you wearing your pink fluffy bunny slippers, too?

[Matt2218 4]

You forgot the "while watching 'merican football on a 50 inch LCD..."

 

Perhaps while eating apple pie and drinking a Bud...jury's out on that one because it would mean eating whilst on the toilet...

 

"Digestive Multitasking"!

 

Without a portion of Buffalo wings??...no way!

I love it Matt, very cool :-)

 

So far I have never used anything besides the default PMDG liveries.

To prevent FSX problems!

(I believe some liveries can cause problems similar to a corrupted panel state?).

 

But if you can assure me this Airforce One livery will not cause any problems than I might just make an exception ;-)

Rob - while we can never be sure (this is FSX we're talking about!), I am not planning to do anything unusual with the files, so the sim should treat it just like a regular PMDG repaint. Just to be safe I will use the "configuration options" file from a default paint downloaded from PMDG, and package it up using the operations center so it will be easy to remove cleanly if you don't like the result.

 

 

Are you wearing your pink fluffy bunny slippers, too?

 

If it gets cold enough

 

[Matt2218 4]

I made some tweaks to the coloring and shined up the belly.

 

Uploading to AVSIM library now...enjoy!

 

[Bob Scott 7,715]

It's not such a far-fetched idea...

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/sep/02/777-may-replace-air-force-one/

 

Cheers

[chaos84 0]

Best response ever! :Applause:

+1

[Azapata87 173]

What an awesome paint job! I had wondered what the 777 would look like as air force one. It would be awesome to see in real life. I look forward to doing a few flights in this while wearing a bath robe.

[CaptCraig 226]

Well after I posted I realized he flies around in that helicopter all the time....only one engine.

 

Don't those choppers have two or three engines? 

[Tino 80]

Well, sure.

 

But on the other hand when you consider the fact that I'm pretending to fly a 750,000lb airplane around in my bathrobe, my imaginary POTUS 'settling' for a 777-300ER is probably not too big of a leap.

 

This is great, you made my day! 

 

Very nice repaint! Hope to see it uploaded to Avsim.

 

Correction: See that you already uploaded. 

 

Cheers,

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I agree with him, honestly. Someone took the time to post it. It's in the same thread. Take the time to get up to speed before posting.

[CaptCraig 226]

That's great!  Wonderful! 

 

Since POTUS (or the gov't anyway) is thinking of upgrading ( :ph34r: ) to the 777, do you think it's in need of a livery update?  Do you enjoy the current colors?  

 

Our A310 got a facelift recently.  I got to take a tour of Trenton from above ages ago in the grey ones.  The A310 is a beauty.  

 

 

Not too fond of the new colors though.  

 

The royal family usually travel on a BA 777 across the pond.  What type is this one?  Not a 777. 

 

 

This would be overkill.  

 

 

 

Would the 777 as a replacement be more economical than the older 747 or newer 748?