The next Air Force One:

Apparently the VC-25s are getting a bit long-in-the-tooth and the government is looking towards replacing them.

Although I saw an artist's conception of an Airbus A380 in the presidential markings, it's not going to happen. EADS says that they are not going to bid, and I doubt if the government would buy an Airbus aircraft anyway.

So since the requirement for 4 engines is still in place, it appears that the next Air Force One will be a variant of the Boeing 747-8.

I just wonder, if they really don't need its extended length, whether they would specify a shorter version, perhaps the same as the existing VC-25?

 

Honestly, these have to be the best maintained airframes on Earth. And, I'm sure they are regularly upgraded to the extent they can be. It seems premature to even be talking about replacement, but, I suppose, by the time they get the designs finalized and into production, we're looking out several years anyway.

WJC, IIRC, purchased the current ACs. So, they're maybe ~20 years old?

CW

 

I think once people hear about the price of the replacements, they'll get upset just like that new helicopter and they'll just keep the old ones. The 747-8 makes sense if they actuallyw will replace. Boeing probably would even give a discount just to get rid of some.

 

Bush senior was the first on the 747s, but I think Reagan ordered them.

 

Begs the question: where do ex-AirForce 1s go to die?

 

I think one is at the Museum of Flight in Seattle and another is at the Reagan museum if memory serves.

They will probably end up at a museum of some sort. The Evergreen museum in McMinnville, OR would be a great place that also has the room to do it.

 

Wright Pat has Harry Trumans.

Reagan Library has his.

 

The USAF museum At Wright Patterson AFB has one of the connies and 707 AF-1's in the presidential hanger. Both of them are open and you can walk through the inside.

 

It was said that by the time that the replacement aircraft are ready, the VC-25s will be 30 years old. I would think that a 747-8 would be much more efficient than a 747-200, no matter how well maintained.

 

How many cycles has it had vs life expectancy?

 

you can walk thru the 707 at the Reagan library too, very cool experience.

that's an interesting question. any way of knowing (or guesstimating) that?

 

The last flight of SAM 27000 (the 707 derivative that went into service in the Nixon administration) last flew GWB in 2001 before being retired. Older planes in the 89th Airlift Wing will often stay in service for, eg, Sec State or other VIPs

 

Is that correct? I was in Ankara in 1991 when GHWB came to visit, I'm pretty sure he was in the 747, maybe only a year or two into service.

 

SAM 28000, the first 747 was put in service during the presidency of GHWB, so you are not mistaken. He used SAM 27000 (2nd 707) during the first part of his presidency, so he flew in both.

SAM 29000 (747) came a bit later.

They are both in use at present.


So will the new plane be SAM 30000?

 

I can't imagine them turning down the extra size of a -8. I was listening to a guy on the presidential helicopter program a few years back talking about how challenging the program was due to the quantity, weight and size of stuff that creeps into the list. Things that nobody wants to be the one to say no to and have to answer later for why it wasn't onboard. He mentioned in specific the medical and life support gear that nobody can say no to, as well as the communications gear. I have forgotten most of the specifics but I had the feeling at the time he probably shouldn't have been speaking about it in public with that much detail. I would imagine that the allure of adding more of that gear to the 747 via the -8 would be impossible to resist.

 

If 4 engines is still the requirement (and I'm surprised it is in this day and age), the 747-8i and the A380 are the only two options.

But they'll go with a 747 not just for national pride, but because they'll be able to pick up a 747-8i at a fire sale price. I love the 747, but it's just not selling and frankly is struggling to find customers. I mean even the 5 recent sales to Korean Air, Korean Air used to be a large 747 operator. But they bought 5 passenger models (and more A380s).

Yep, the USAF will likely get these at fire sale prices, and I'd be shocked if they weren't completed frames sitting in the desert by the time the decision is made.

 

How about a KingAir? I just saw that AF1 was a KA when LBJ was going down to the ranch.
If it was good enuff for him...? Bet Nancy'd pitch a hissy if she saw a high-tailed twin taxiing her way... ... Much less some of the current wh "staff"...
Cheers,
RE

 

Three engines was the requirement at one time when they were upgrading from the second iteraton of the 707.

Douglas submitted a bid using the DC-10.

 

some version of the Dreamliner I would guess, maybe a slightly shortened version, with increased power

 

I suppose that three engines might have still been acceptable, but there aren't any such candidate aircraft at present!

 

That might be the economical/practical choice, but the President of the United States is representing the might of America abroad and you will want him getting off an impressively-sized 4-engined plane. There's no way they'll opt for the Dreamliner when they can have a 747.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

provided they figure the 747 airframe can be used the life term they want, the newer airframe is the Dreamliner, but is dual engine of course, but it's also the "American" choice over say an airbus
a design buildup of a 747 variant for the next 20 year lifespan would be quite a costly project

 

Exactly - I don't recall the reason Bush 43 was in the 707 in 2001, but you are correct - both 747s were in service at the time. He just flew the 707 for one reason or another - it was retired shortly thereafter.

 

Dreamliner isn't an option because when you factor how AF1 is laid out, and the number of staff it carriers, the 787 (outside of possibly the -10 series) just isn't big enough. An equivalent aircraft would be the 777-300ER (or even the newer 777-9).

But the 787-8/9 doesn't have the square footage to accommodate the President, his staff, the press corp, etc.

 

It's funny how the 707 - a smaller aircraft than the 787 - was once adequate for the task. Maybe that's just emblematic of the growth of the executive branch in general!