Pentagon Eyes New Air Force One

Lets face facts here. The present pair of Aircraft while they may not travel everyday with the president the y do fly almost daily for pilot training. This means the airframes do have a large number of hours on them. It is also true that the two aircraft are the best maintained planes in the world and are kept in almost showroom condition. Still they are old and parts for this 747-200 are hard to come by. It is time to replace then just as was done with the 707 aircraft which were replaced more often.

Now there are only two manufactures who can supply the type of four engine aircraft that is required for Presidential Conveyance. They would be the Boeing 747-8 and the Airbus A380.

I for one would not want the President of the United States being transported in an Aircraft built buy a totally foreign country. When the AF one aircraft lands it is a symbol of the United State regardless if the president is on board or not. It would not be much of a symbol if it was built by Airbus. That and the fact that the A380 is way to much aircraft for Presidential travel. The A380 cannot go into many of the airports the present 747-200 or the 747-8 can operate from.

To ask a manufacturer to design a new aircraft or to retrofit an existing aircraft with four engines is cost prohibitive. So contrary to the article stating the Joints Chiefs have sourcing choice they do not. The new twins for AF one have to a Boeing and they have to be the 747-8.

If they stuck with the original configuration thats on the 200, there is no way they could stuff all of the equipment into a twin, hospital, dual APU's, etc.
There is no other 747's maintained like these two, re-engine is the answer.

Don't overlook the fact the Air Force One serves as an aerial presidential command center. In the event of a national emergency, all functions of the President (and his/her cabinet and staff) must be able to be carried out on board that a/c. A 777 could work possibly, but a 747 is a much better option, given it's size, endurance, speed, and 4 engines. Plus, we're talking about AIR FORCE ONE...what other U.S. made a/c is befitting of the title? If you want the a/c size downgraded, you might as well have the President move out of the White House and into a townhouse. There are just some perks that come with being President of the United States, and lets face it, without those perks who the hell would even want the job??

It seems unlikely that Airbus will get an opportunity to bid, so is there really any option besides the 747-8?

Dear Pentagon: Make due with what you have - only the finest fleet on the planet which want for nothing! Are you needing the "new car smell"?

If B52s still fly ... just sayin' ...

The plane need to match the passenger, in this case it's the leader of the free world, so a 747-800 converted for Air Force 1 capabilities is appropriate.

There have been a lot of good comments and some fun, light-hearted ones. Bringing this ALL back in to perspective...

How many jets will have the capacity to have the following defense systems crammed in AND allow for the other things I will mention later?

Defenses: chaffing, laser, missiles,guns,EMP shielding,Nuclear shielding,radar "cloaking", not to mention what we don't know about.

Capacity: On board secure, and non secure, communications bay, kitchens, sleeping quarters, offices, meeting rooms, Secret Service, armory, surgical bay, spare parts for the aircraft, the "select" media pool (the others get to fly in another aircraft), Airborne Command Capabilities, and lest we forget, THE PRESIDENT and HIS FAMILY (at times). I am sure I left a few out.

Location accessibility: Personally, I would LOVE a C-5 fitted for the needs of the President, but not very realistic. Most airports in the world can easily handle a 747-200. A 47-8 is able to get in to even smaller airports, is more fuel efficient, much less of a sound wake, and as previously mentioned in the forum, AF-1 arriving, sitting there, and taking off are truly "EVENTS". I have had the honor of seeing AF-1 on several occasions. Beautiful! It makes me PROUD to be an American. THAT is OUR Aircraft!

Finally there is the SEVERE stress the "twins" are put under on a routine basis. They are out training for the most horrific events they can think of. Those aircraft are not just performing flights for the President. I once saw one, in the steepest climb, then roll to starboard, do an exceptionally tight turn, then OMG NOSE DIVE (okay my heart is back in my throat as I am writing this) and suddenly. after coming down to I would guess no more than 2,000, pull back up in another incredibly steep climb! I thought the President was going to dye right in front of me! (Obviously they were training.) That was scary and awesome to see. I hope I NEVER see it again! Once is enough for me. IF any of you have seen any of the footage of AF-1 on 9-11 you have a little insight as to what this aircraft may be called upon to provide at ANY point in time.

The air-frame, skin, engines, and body are put under MORE STRESS than the "normal" 47. It IS time to consider a NEW set. Yes there are a lot of different aircraft in the PAW. A 77-3, or above, still would not be able to provide what is needed in this case. I want OUR President to arrive safely, when traveling, period.

I have truly enjoyed all of the comments in here on this one.

Thank you for letting me lay out MY observations as to WHY it needs to be done. Take from this what you will. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. We need to make sure we respect that when people post. I will say this forum tends to be pretty darn good about that!

The first things to be replaced will be the rotary aircraft. THAT is coming right around the corner! The fixed wing is still a way off.

Thanks again everyone!

This is crap ! If I may paraphrase an old movie line... "We don't NEED no stinkin new Air Force One"

Just more bureaucratic BS. If you can fly B-52's that are 50 years old, the President can certainly fly in a -200. Just a waste of a pot full of our tax dollars. Now when he takes a vacation with his family - tell me why he doesn't just put the VP in charge and take a Gulfstream? Save us a few of our hard-earned bucks.

They should just use a tricked-out C-17. Lots of space, already in the inventory (spares, parts, etc.), and already proven. I the C-17 is too small, use a C-5.

I totally concur with toolguy105's assessment. The 47-8 is MUCH more fuel efficient, has a GREAT payload capability, and a greatly reduced sound wake. It can use a SHORTER runway (allowing easier access to smaller runway countries) and it still has the WORLD RECOGNIZED grandeur associated with the POTUS. I, for one, do NOT want AMERICA'S JET to be made MAINLY by a multi-country, EU, company. As it IS America's jet it should be American made.

The A380 would allow for a LOT more capacity. That is a given. It would not be able to land in Des Moines, Iowa or Houston, Hobby etc. It needs to be an aircraft which get's the JOB done. That includes visiting MANY smaller airports here at home and abroad.

Yes, these are the two absolutely best kept 47-2's in the WORLD, they need replaced. They do NOT operate under the "normal" tolerances of any other 47-2. These two beautiful aircraft have been, an continue to be, pushed to every possible scenario therefore putting EXTREME stress upon EVERY SINGLE ELEMENT of the aircraft.

When it comes down to it... whatever WE think just doesn't matter!

Not really, the 800 is the logical choice, I doubt they would look at any twin engined machines. Although the 777 and maybe even 787 would be a pretty cool air force "1"

How many cycles have these 2 airframes gone thru anyway?

Get'em new engines and keep trucking.

Much like the government (and many US citizens), it's time to downsize and improve efficiency. I would think the 787 would suffice for the space needed, even if they go with the -900, or whatever numeric assignment denotes the largest Dreamliner series. If that's too small, let the press outlets pay to fly their reporters around. Why should the citizens continue to foot the bill for them?

Canadian prime minister flies around in 30 year old airbus A300, painted in dark green, uses smaller crj's for smaller journeys.

Get him a Pogo Stick. Time to stop spending money on traveling politicians

The reporters, aids and equipment ake a great deal of room. Besides even if Obama wins in November he would likely even fly on the new plane, if so it would toward the end of his terms. Thus, making quips about Obama is ridiculous.

Can we aford it ?

At estimated cost of $47000.00 an hour to fly airforce one the plane should not be used for puddle jumping nor does another 747 need to follow the first " wasting money "

Where in the H.... is the present administration getting the money??????????

Where in the H..... is the money come from?????????

FYI...
In 1939 President Franklin Roosevelt proclaimed August 19 to be National Aviation Day. The day coincides with the birthday of Orville Wright, who piloted the Wright Flyer. He and his brother Wilbur are given credit for building the world’s first successful airplane with aircraft controls that enabled them to steer the plane. Orville Wright made the first flight for 12 seconds and 120 feet around the site of Wright Brothers National Memorial on December 17, 1903. They were not the first to build and fly experimental aircraft but they are the first to invent aircraft controls that made fixed wing flight possible. The Wright brothers' status as inventors of the airplane has been an issue of debate, particularly as there were competing claims regarding other early aviators. Another national observation in the United States is Wright Brothers Day on December 17 each year.

Each year the president may issue a proclamation to: designate August 19 as National Aviation Day; call on government officials to display the flag of the United States on all government buildings on the day; and invite people living in the United States to observe the day with appropriate exercises to further stimulate interest in aviation in the United States.

The Fact Is, We are Now a Bankrupt Nation and Yes the 747's need to be parked so that our Elected Officials, who were Supposed to be Guiding Our Nation to Prosperity and the Pursuit Of Happiness, can travel in the mode they DESERVE ! My Vote is Cast for the Next Air Force One, A Beech 18!! Appropriate because Beech has been driven into Bankruptcy by these SAME LAME Gov't Officials who keep giving our DOD Contracts to FOREIGN Mfg.s Wake Up Americans! Stop rewarding people who are Taking Your Hard Earned Dollars and giving them to Foreigners!!

And please, don't call me "Mommy"! You are off the radar as far as I'm concerned. You know....It's your world and I'm just passing thru it.

Well, that didn't hurt me a bit! And I was never on "Your Back"! I'm pleased, and I hope you are as well, to have had the chance to met Neal Armstrom. He was truely a great man with integrity and he was humble at the same time. I admire people like that! And maybe the most imortant thing of all...is that he loved the space program and the possibilies that would create in "space". And what we on Earth would, can and will do in the future.

Donna, you are always saying, change makes the world go 'round. I agree, too a certain point. There is nobody in office that I would consider a "Hero"!
Neal Armstrong was a "Hero" in my eyes. And thankyou God for giving him life to experience and witness "Curiosity" and the amazing and unbelievable sights that he and the rest of the world saw on Mars. It's not a "dead planet"...it's just taking a time out. Neal Armsrong is a true hero to me. Maybe, it might behoove you to go to the conventions...not as a delgate but a USA commoner and voice your opinion. Can't hurt! This is not a polital forum. Let's stick with the subject on hand.

At the risk of revealing my naivete, I ask the question: Does it actually matter that we know there is a plan for a new Air Force One either before the fact or even after the fact? Do "we" have the power or the privilege of waggling our finger and saying no, no, no, you can't buy that just yet?

Being a part of the Boeing Dreamliner Design Team I will say this about the 87... there is SOME potential there. While we ALL agree money is an issue this has been put in to budgets for quite some time now. Another member, I apologize for NOT having the exact name, made the Achilles heel point of the 87... TWO ENGINES. Pretty darn good safety records from the advent of the LR, 2 engine, Wide body aircraft. I HIGHLY doubt they would EVER trust the life of the POTUS to a mere 2 engines. They are GREAT engines just not enough of them!

At this point in time it is just a RFP to be issued, and even at that, in a few years from now. Who knows what will be the final DELIVERY date! Heck, the POTUS could be flying from DC to London in under an hour by then! ROTFL. :-)

(If the Pres. decides to fly in a CESSNA 152 it IS AF-1!) Wouldn't THAT be a sight!

I am still for the 47-8. THEY will do whatever THEY want. This HAS been a fun forum, there have been some GREAT ideas, and some VERY funny one's too. Thanks for launching this forum!

Happy flying everyone!

BTW... United is announcing a where they are planning on flying their initial 87's. I can't wait to give her the good ole' try!

I would like to see a 748 - SP smaller EZ to move arnd and faster ←→

I don't see the Air Force and the Secret Service going for a twin engined replacement, as much as I like the 777 and the 787. And there is no way in hell they're buying Airbuses for this, so it's got to be the 747-8.

I'm LOLing! It' just the facts and opinions. What did I say that offended you?

James, you can take what I said and blow it out your "APU"! I'm just giving you info on AirForce One. Don't understand why you think my post has "Zero Substance"! I'm just giving you my opinion, along with facts and research. The govenment is going to do what they are going to do, whether we like it or not.! We...the people, once again, don't have the control over the issue. I was giving my opinion. Isn't what this "Forum" is all about?

707's and B52's rock! I bet you ask the brave airmen and women who fly them and they tell you they not part with the beloved birds for all the tea in China...

The current 747-200 "Air force One" is one pampered thoroughbred and should not be put out to pasture anytime soon. Although, I would like to correct the "Operating Cost" of the a/c, that was posted earlier. The Operating Cost for "Air Force 1 is $181,000.00 per hour. As far as "Cycles", she has been thru the ringer....no doubt...but that just shows you the "integrity" of a Boeing built aircraft...like the B-52. Just a little F.Y.I., The current AF-1 went thru 154 cycles alone...just flying George Sr. Home to Texas and back to D.C. 77 times within his term in office! You do the math at $181,000.00 per hour!

Are we nuts.

Presidents are replaceable. But we have B-52s and 707 generation tankers defending our country that are three or more decades lokder and hawe far more hours.

Let's get those who go in harms way to defend our nation some up to date aircraft before we get the president a new toy.

I looked at the Air Force and Boeing web sites and they say that Airbus is not participating in the bid. They are now looking at the 747-8 or the 787. Personally I think the president traveling in a Dreamliner would show the world superior American ingenuity and engineering.

Actually I just checked, the plane would come online in 2020!

Its all obsolete no need to travel by airplane On my planet we chat by telecom. Just another way to piss taxpayer money away. Another 25 years this county will be a dictatorship They just keep chipping away at our rights in the name of national security Tap our phones strip us half naked to travel and build billion dollar bombers to bomb a hut up in the hills of who knows where Its out of control people We are lemmings going over a cliff They need a new airplane like I need a hemorrhoid

Didn't we just recently get new Marine One helicopters?

Regardless of which side of this debate you are on, it is ironic that this comes out a few days after another FA squawk about USAF going out of business, especially with the possible funding sequestration looming on the horizon. Either they don't believe it will happen or they are just totally impervious to the the shape of everbody's pocketbook right now.

I read on Wikipedia that Boeing will be offering the 787 Dreamliner for the project, did not say exclusively the 787 but it will be proposed. Boeing appears to agree with most of us, 787 is a good size, and the 787-800 is just too much

I am pretty sure this is what George wanted and was cancelled when Obama first took office.

it is about time. I hope it's the 747-8. it needs to be big and represent our wealth and power.

In the view of the financial health of the US and Europe, now is not the time for a new Presidential conveyance. There is no good reason to replace the current (2) Air Force One.
Since they don't rotate the same as a commercial 747, they're must be plenty of airframe time left on them.

Mr. Kendall needs to be replaced with a newer version.

Don't forget there are (and likely will be) 2 of these bad boys built, likely at a cost of 450-500 million each, that if it is fully kitted like the existing planes are, half the cost of a B2 bomber. I think the plane that carries the leader of the most powerful country on earth deserves some latitude on getting a total kick butt 747-800, not too mention its only in proposal phase and likely 4 years away at best, and once in service will likely be around for 25-30 years. Let the Man have his plane....

Give me a break! Do NOT waste our money. Try setting a good example and make due with what you have.

@james wallace, what's the point of your posts? zero substance. "LOL", we hope that keeps you entertained.

Yes, please send out the RFP to Airbus, Sukoi, Embraer, Bombardier, and especially Comac!

Remember they always fly with AF cargo planes as well, often a C5-A or a few C-17's to carry the vehicles. They bring two of the full size Prez limos we've all seen, a WH mobile comm van, a bunch of Suburbans and there's more. If they need a helicopter, they bring at least two of them. They don't use local rides, everything is hauled in from DC. Don't forget the advance teams of Secret Service agents in and out, on the smaller AF planes. And the protection teams on travel day.

I know on some overseas trips, they bring both 747's and a cargo plane of spare parts. They even bring equipment to test local Jet-A although the AF 747's can do mid air refueling which means more those aircraft need to be deployed.

Don't worry, for political campaign trips, his party reimburses the cost to the gov't. But only equal to the cost of a commercial ticket for each political person on board.
Oh I almost forgot they separately fly a medical team around too. Some of this might be dated but you get the idea.

Who is John Galt?

refurbish the current fleet for international travel and by a GV or a plane of similar size for domestic flights

Everyone has raised some good points here. This issue kind of hits a raw nerve due to the many bail outs and wholesale rape of public money that have come squarely off the backs of mostly middle class Americans.

There is no good reason why this or any future administration deserve to have the hundreds of millions of dollars made available for luxury travel...with their friends on ANY aircraft whilst there is so much poverty and loss of jobs right here in our own backyard.

Don't get me wrong, I'm pro technology and love aviation technology, but now is just not the time for such a huge expenditure.
Put the money where it's needed, into the hands of the jobless Americans HERE so we can start to rebuild all the industry and technology, (built off the backs of hard working Americans), that the government has so freely given away.

GV or BBJ would do just fine. Let the press corps pay their own way.

While you are at it, just build another house to live in too. The White House is too old..

I agree, Obama should kick in half as they never shut the engines down he travels so much. I really wish they actually had to pay to use it on campaigns. I guess they really could not afford to. The costs for him to run around to campaign is astronomical. All the planes, cars, hotels, staff etc. I bet if we really knew, the tax payers would demand he limit his activities. Much cheaper to put up jumbotrons in several locations while he stays in Washington and maybe work!! He needs to go anyway.

It's a shame the 747 cannot follow in the footsteps of the B-52. Upgrade, strengthen, upgrade and get every penny out of the 747 that may be squeezed out of it. I'm not saying keep the 747's for fifty-plus years, but why not use it as long as it may be used?

Save us all a buck. First make it illegal for him to us AF1 for re-election and fund raising trips. Second, keep current AF 1 but cut way back on its usage. Only for approved for trips over 1,000 miles, international travel, and strategic command situations. Third, for shorter trips, use a smaller business class jet. Heck, if they cut out the fund raising, reelection trips might get another 10 years out of AF1.

Lastly, let the guy fly commercial coach once in awhile like the rest of us normal folks. Be good for his attitude, and humility.

I strongly believe that if the Air Force looks into the 748, the gov't should be able to save in fuel costs in the long run. Besides, the 748 is almost comparable to the 742 with better engines, and can fly faster.

why not a 747-8 for international trips and a smaller, say 767/787 for western hemispheres trips.... frankly, I'd like to see "the chief" use a much smaller, more economical plane... makes me sick to see Bush/Obama fly all over the U.S. in the big, expensive 747... costs us, that's us taxpayers millions to operate the 747.. and it's unnecessary for trips in the U.S.

Hello A380!

Wow, comac.....great reference....

The Obama gang does not care, look what Pelosi, when she was speaker of the House of Rep's raped the American taxpayers with her use of govt. airplane use

747-8 All the way!

On 28 January 2009, EADS announced they would not bid on the program
i found this so unless some one comes out of the woods them its boeings to take

I guess they will stay with the Boeing line.Possibly the 747-8

On the heals of the NASA $$$$ waste .. our tax money to be wasted again ? What the heck is wrong with the numerous helo's and two AF-1 aircraft they have now ? I suppose, it will be be a new limo next, too .. With the current Presidential contest, some one at teh Pentagon, must of tought we'd miss this one as they attempt to sneak it in "under the radar" ...

I stand corrected on the A310 and color, my apologies. I do know the P.M will use a smaller aircraft for the ottawa-Toronto trip, not sure what it is though, either way, certainly no hospital or electronic nuclear command controls on board, maybe Obama and future American Presidents won't need that making the 747-800 a more economical of the rack "VIP" jet which boeing already manufactures.