HomieOC

Airforce one livery please..

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

strange this wasn't part of the paints from pmdg?

given its unique-ness n all.

 

luke pype

Edited by MaDDogz
Not seeing my sig that contains name, and not getting post deleted due actions out of my control

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MaDDogz said:

strange this wasn't part of the paints from pmdg?

given its unique-ness n all.

Considering the real Air Force One was based off of the Boeing 747-200B rather than the Boeing 747-400....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MaDDogz said:

strange this wasn't part of the paints from pmdg?

given its unique-ness n all.

 

luke pype

Well, for a kick off it's not the correct type of aeroplane to depict the two VC-25s which function as 'Air Force One', which explains why it isn't in the included PMDG paint jobs. The current Boeing for that role is a VC-25, which is essentially heavily customised Boeing 747-200B. And the next Boeing 747 model due to replace those VC-25s is now confirmed to be a Boeing 747-8 (they were considering the A380 and the 787, but Airbus didn't want to make it - probably in case it crashed, cos I bet that would go down well, if you pardon the pun lol - and the 787 is probably too small and also not as well proven as the 747, so they probably didn't want to chance it with the POTUS on an aeroplane which hasn't been around for very long and which might have issues), so the 747-400 is not gonna ever be Air Force One (officially at least that is, since Air Force One could in fact be any aeroplane being that it is the callsign for any US Air Force operated aircraft on which the POTUS is aboard).

I daresay someone will do a paint job for it in that livery anyway, but it will be missing all the funky stuff the real VC-25 has externally which makes it apparent that it ain't a normal Boeing 747-200B, i.e. all the additional avionics and comms antennas for the secure communications and ECM equipment, the IR dazzler system, decoy flare ejectors, in-flight refuelling gear, etc, etc. And of course the flight deck is gonna be completely wrong for it too, since a B747-200B has a flight engineer station and the one in those VC-25s probably has all kinds of funky stuff in there which is almost certainly classified.

I know that doesn't preclude someone from doing a paint job, and as I say, I daresay someone will, but PMDG aren't into doing stuff which isn't real-world accurate, which is a shame, cos I want them to make Thunderbird 2 lol. Thunderbird 2 is of course way cooler than Air Force One, since it has a Two in its name, which obviously makes it twice as good as Air Force One, especially since Virgil Tracy flies it, and he was always the cool one, being that he can also play the piano, and paint. Actually, come to think of it, since he can paint, maybe he will do that repaint for the PMDG 747, that would be F.A.B. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, someone will probably do it anyway. After all, to most people all 747s pretty much look the same.

Although it you actually want a 747-200 for FSX, there is this payware one, which is in no way a high level study sim, but it flies okay and is cheap and cheerful:

https://www.justflight.com/product/747-200-300-hd-fsx

Or if you prefer something for free which has a genuine VC-25 model, there is this for the updated freebie POSKY one, which can be made to work in FSX:

https://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/files/5147/fsx-boeing-vc-25a-update/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Justflight 747 Classic cockpit layout is analog but the Air Force plane had a digital retrofit. The closest to simulating you can do is if you can find the Ready for Pushback beta that had the digital displays. I can't find it I had the old RFP and hoped they finished it but they never did - David Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think RfP ever finished it. Sad to see they are gone, I would love a proper -200 in P3D, but I don't think it's financially viable to make that kind of sims any more...

 

Re: AF1 paint, someone already has done it. I've seen screenshots. Probably you can find it on Avsim library.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Chock said:

and the 787 is probably too small and also not as well proven as the 747

Could be..., my theory is they need the four engines for the electrical loads.  The E4B I used to have access to had 400KVA alternators on each engine and I believe VC25 needed most of that to operate the communications center located in the converted aft cargo hold.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's probably true, apparently there are 78 telephones on those VC-25s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the OP--there are at least two AF-1 repaints for the PMDG B744 v3 in the AVSIM library already.

As to the real current VC-25, the flight deck is mostly round-dial analog fare, but not your standard 747-200 layout.  Some of the analog instruments have been substituted with electronic equivalents, like an EADI/EHSI, for example, but it's not an integrated digital flight deck like on the B744 or B777.

The next AF-1 is going to be a 747-8 airframe, and I'd guess it'll be a hybrid digital-analog flight deck.  Digital is harder to shield from nuclear EMP effects, so I'd be surprised to see a heavily-computerized flight deck unless it has a lot of analog redundancy.

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Digital is harder to shield from nuclear EMP effects,

The EMP shielding is an issue regardless of digital/analog instrumentation.  I'm not familiar with VC25s but the E4B was extensively shielded to the extent that all windows had a wire mesh embedded in it a la' microwave oven door.  There are also specific protections required within the electrical system to shunt any pulse away from electrical equipment analog and digital.  It is quite an extensive science.  In the end, the only protection is no electronics which is why I was part of a project that gave CINCSAC rebuilt magneto phones between residence and CP (really...an an old time wall mounted crank telephone, it blended in with the historic nature of their residence and made the wife happy).  That assignment to Offutt was one of my more interesting tours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, downscc said:

The EMP shielding is an issue regardless of digital/analog instrumentation.

True.  The difference, though, is that the voltages and induced currents required to damage analog, motorized devices is generally multiple orders of magnitude higher than for microtransistor based circuits.  Unshielded, both are at risk, but analog circuitry is usually far more robust.

You ever see that big wood platform they built off the edge of a cliff at Kirtland AFB for EMP testing?  That thing was way cool...everything, even the fasteners, was made of wood.  No idea if it's even still there...last time I saw it must have been 40+ years ago.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, w6kd said:

You ever see that big wood platform they built off the edge of a cliff at Kirtland AFB for EMP testing?  That thing was way cool...everything, even the fasteners, was made of wood.  No idea if it's even still there...last time I saw it must have been 40+ years ago.

I've seen pictures of it.  Speaking of wood, during my tour at Offutt, SAC had a VLF 100KW transmitter out in the middle of NE which was one of my detachments.  We had a contractor repair the fence but not according to specifications. They used nails instead of wood pegs and the fence fell apart in a few days.  The building for the transmitter equipment, operations and maintenance people was under ground adjacent to the 1200 ft antenna. The Army corps of engineers left behind a nice gravel runway at the site so I was able to make visits with an aero club Piper Arrow, reimbursable of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, downscc said:

I've seen pictures of it.

Dan

A B-52 on a wooden structure hundreds of feet high beside a cliff.

I remember in the 80s' there was sense of urgency to harden 3c. I haven't heard anything about in 20-30 years. Do you know what the status is? Several well placed nuclear warheads detonated 200-300  mile above  the central U. S. would put this country out of business and eventually lead to the death of about 90% of the population. Is the electrical grid hardened?

I believe EMP first became widely apparent after a 1962 high altitude test in the Pacific. In 1963 the Test Ban Treaty went into effect which eliminated above ground testing. So the EMP testing done on the side of cliffs and where ever else had to been done without the benefit of nuclear warheads to cause the EMP. What was used to create the pulse?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2017 at 4:24 AM, Captain Kevin said:

Considering the real Air Force One was based off of the Boeing 747-200B rather than the Boeing 747-400....

There are many of the PMDG 777 and PMDG 747 repaints that indicate the repaint is "fictional".  That's what I want.  The "fictional" one with the PMDG 747-400 v3 (drool forming at corners of mouth...). 

21 hours ago, w6kd said:

For the OP--there are at least two AF-1 repaints for the PMDG B744 v3 in the AVSIM library already.

@Bob:  I'm not the OP but do you know where in the AVSIM Library these "two AF-1, PMDG B744 v3" repaints are located.  I have used every search term and only see like the VC25 and the PMDG744 to find those repaints.  I suspect I need more training on the AVSIM Library...  Thanks for any assistance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jim Young said:

@Bob:  I'm not the OP but do you know where in the AVSIM Library these "two AF-1, PMDG B744 v3" repaints are located.  I have used every search term and only see like the VC25 and the PMDG744 to find those repaints.  I suspect I need more training on the AVSIM Library...  Thanks for any assistance.

Here's the one I've been using.  There's another one in there somewhere--a repaint of the 747-400M that I had downloaded a while back and have since deleted.

https://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=198600

Cheers

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bob for the link.  Even though I now know the file name, I still cannot find it in the Library.  I found the E4B through a search but not the AF1.  Not a big deal except I won't sleep tonight.  Good thing I have friends like you to help out old people like me!

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago, I ran the simulator for Air Force 1 pilots who were evaluating the 747-400 as a replacement, this was maybe in like 1996 or 1997. There main issue at the time was the 2 pilot vs 3 man crew. They came several times over several weeks, but eventually ruled it out. You can bet with the -8, it will not be a run of the mill airliner. 

I agree with Bob, his third paragraph was also their concern and they suggested it would be highly modified...

On 3/8/2017 at 3:16 PM, w6kd said:

For the OP--there are at least two AF-1 repaints for the PMDG B744 v3 in the AVSIM library already.

As to the real current VC-25, the flight deck is mostly round-dial analog fare, but not your standard 747-200 layout.  Some of the analog instruments have been substituted with electronic equivalents, like an EADI/EHSI, for example, but it's not an integrated digital flight deck like on the B744 or B777.

The next AF-1 is going to be a 747-8 airframe, and I'd guess it'll be a hybrid digital-analog flight deck.  Digital is harder to shield from nuclear EMP effects, so I'd be surprised to see a heavily-computerized flight deck unless it has a lot of analog redundancy.

Regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling they'll include a paint with the release of the 747-8 expansion, as the next AF1 will be based on it. Maybe they'll go the extra mile and all the unique features like refueling port and anti-attack devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NEXTGENERIC said:

anti-attack devices

Hi,

Highly doubt it. PMDG didn't implement the cockpit lock system for security reasons. I don't see them implementing highly controlled military systems in the cockpit.
And anyway, I don't think they would be granted access to the data of the system to reproduce it in public simulator! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Budbud said:

Hi,

Highly doubt it. PMDG didn't implement the cockpit lock system for security reasons. I don't see them implementing highly controlled military systems in the cockpit.
And anyway, I don't think they would be granted access to the data of the system to reproduce it in public simulator! :rolleyes:

Sorry, I didn't mean the actual systems. I meant the sensors on the exterior, etc. Purely aesthetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet if you use the freighter version of the -400 as a base for the paint, you could make it pretty close even if we dont have a -200

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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