Sign in to follow this  
nhagag

Pentagon picks new Air Force One plane

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Why do they need 8 to replace 2?  B)

 

I wonder if they will be 3D-printed like the money to pay for them? Just wondering. 

Share this post


Link to post

Why do they need 8 to replace 2?  B)

 

I wonder if they will be 3D-printed like the money to pay for them? Just wondering. 

 

Obama wore out the older one. 

Share this post


Link to post

Obama wore out the older one. 

Naw, Bush wore it out looooong before Obama was president.

Share this post


Link to post

I think I read somewhere that they will order 3 748s. Can't find the story though. 

Share this post


Link to post

In Britain we have austerity so our Government's just chosen our Prime Ministerial fleet replacement ;-

 

Two old Piper Tomahawks, and a Cessna 150.

 

 

Dave Cameron at the controls of his new C150 earlier today.

Cessna-150-230x150.jpg

Picture courtesy of Fox News - so it's definitely true.

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post

In Britain we have austerity so our Government's just chosen our Prime Ministerial fleet replacement ;-

 

Two old Piper Tomahawks, and a Cessna 150.

 

 

Dave Cameron at the controls of his new C150 earlier today.

Cessna-150-230x150.jpg

Picture courtesy of Fox News - so it's definitely true.

 

:lol:

Now that's funny!

Share this post


Link to post

The Air Force currently has three of the -4's so it would make sense that they would order three of the -8's.

Share this post


Link to post

Are they going to keep the C-32's (757) flying or are they replacing them as well

Share this post


Link to post

I doubt the C-32's will be retiring anytime soon.  I was stationed in Northern Japan when they were shaking the cobwebs off of em back around 1998 before going into service with VIP's.  All kinds of Space-A seats available to and from the states for a couple of weeks I remember.

 

I did have the pleasure of flying on the C-32's twice during my military career for duty.  We weren't Air Force One, but rather second fiddle as Air Force Two on both flights (hard to guess who else was onboard :lol:).  Boy you talk about first class, I was treated like a king!!

Share this post


Link to post

3 of them modified for the POTUS will cost around $1.5 Billion but on the bright side they do save a salary of the Flight Engineer.

Share this post


Link to post

Why do they need 8 to replace 2?  B)

They aren't, they are only buying two 747-800 aircraft. The -800 is much larger capacity than the ancient -200 version.

 

The reason for replacement is simply one of age. The current 747-200 aircraft will be 30 years old by the time the replacements are ready in 2017, and according to the Pentagon, parts are getting hard to come by.

 

Have the folks replying in this thread actually read the linked article? From some of the comments, apparently not!

 

Nota bene: emphasis below is mine

 

The two Boeing 747-200 planes that the President currently uses will reach the end of their 30-year service life in 2017, and according to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. Air Force has set aside $1.65 billion between 2015 and 2019 for two replacement jets.

Share this post


Link to post

The Air Force currently has three of the -4's so it would make sense that they would order three of the -8's.

I thought they only had 2 -200s for the President. I'm not including the E-4B because I assume that that aircraft will not be replaced. 

 

3 of them modified for the POTUS will cost around $1.5 Billion but on the bright side they do save a salary of the Flight Engineer.

Where did you see that they will order 3? I thought I read it somewhere but I can't find the story and it's driving me crazy.

Share this post


Link to post

Ha, at least a few saw that I was simply being whimsical!  I suspect English humour doesn't translate that well across the pond!

 

With respect, which aircraft the Office of the US President will be re-equipped with, or how many, is of very little interest to me. But I do respect that it is of great interest to others. 

 

Regards 

Share this post


Link to post

Have the folks replying in this thread actually read the linked article? From some of the comments, apparently not! 

 

Are we perhaps taking it a little seriously, Fr. Bill ? :smile:

 

Actually, I read Gareth's ("Geedubs") comment about "8 replacing 2" as humor (based on maths; not easy!). I think you may have missed that.

 

Ha, at least a few saw that I was simply being whimsical!  I suspect English humour doesn't translate that well across the pond!

 

So it seems Gareth! :smile:

Share this post


Link to post

Are we perhaps taking it a little seriously, Fr. Bill ? :smile:

 

Actually, I read Gareth's ("Geedubs") comment about "8 replacing 2" as humor (based on maths; not easy!). I think you may have missed that.

Oh, I understood the humour alright.

 

The second paragraph concerned a few others who seem to have transmuted two aircraft to three, and conflated -200's with -400's :LMAO:

Share this post


Link to post

I doubt the C-32's will be retiring anytime soon.  I was stationed in Northern Japan when they were shaking the cobwebs off of em back around 1998 before going into service with VIP's.  All kinds of Space-A seats available to and from the states for a couple of weeks I remember.

 

I did have the pleasure of flying on the C-32's twice during my military career for duty.  We weren't Air Force One, but rather second fiddle as Air Force Two on both flights (hard to guess who else was onboard :lol:).  Boy you talk about first class, I was treated like a king!!

 

I think the C-32's are awesome. New Zealand has three of them they use for flying the Prime Minister as well as other military duties. They have flown them in and out of Antarctica so goes to show how tough the machines are. 

 

If the US does replace them down the road I guess the 787 would be a nice replacement. 

Share this post


Link to post

It makes sense to replace the almost 30 year old VC-25s (747-200B) with the newer, larger, and more fuel efficient 747-800.  Not to mention the proven track record and success of an airliner series that's been operating for about 45 years.

 

Air Force One needs to be a 4-engined aircraft to be able to survive a loss of 2 engines and still fly.  It could probably even make an emergency landing with only a single engine provided that enough weight is shedded.

 

The Pentagon made the right decision here.

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post

Not exactly a surprise. The president of the US is hardly going to be flying around the world in a foreign aircraft.

 

Minor note, but they chose the 747-8, as in eight, not eight hundred.  :P

Share this post


Link to post

Minor note, but they chose the 747-8, as in eight, not eight hundred. 

 

Yes and the same goes for the 787-3, 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10

 

They no longer name in hundreds anymore

Share this post


Link to post

I heard that the C-32 that Kerry was on recently was delayed due to some maintenance issue and they have been having some problems with them.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this