Air Force One due for a replacement?

I have no problem with a dedicated aircraft for the President; this has been done for years and many other heads-of-state have dedicated aircraft as well. And this started long before there were particular security concerns like we have today.

I also have no problem with requiring a four-engine aircraft for long-distance overwater travel, even though plenty of twin-engine jets fly those routes every day without incident. But I do agree with the use of a twin-engine Air Force One for domestic or other short-distance trips. If a 757 isn't roomy enough, a 767 or 787 would do just fine.

 

All I know is that if they replace it with anything but a Boeing, I flat refuse to fly on it! Bwahahahaha

 

W ordered it after 9/11 - the Speaker is 3rd in line for the presidency. Hastert commuted in a GIII, but he lived in Illinois, not CA. Seems legit to me. No other members of congress have regular AF travel provided.

 

They need to make AF smaller, not larger. More airports accessible with smaller planes in emergencies or unplanned detours. Less people aboard so less chance someone gets on that shouldn't be (I know very unlikely, but still nothing is 100% perfect).

I would think a G650 is the best bet. Fast, can access many airports, small with limited # of people aboard, long range, uses less fuel than a widebody. If I was in his position, that's what I'd fly in. Otherwise, the safest mode of travel I could see would be flying in the back of an F15 fully armed. If we ever do elect a President again that served in the military, I hope it's someone that flew fighters and elects to fly themselves in an F22.

 

I hear ya - to a point. Don't forget all the things we know the 747 can do, let alone what we don't - advanced comms (video facilities if potus needs to address country in flight, let alone launch nuclear weapons), in-flight refueling, countermeasures, range to wherever you need in an emergency, cabin for press (they pay a lot per seat), private rooms for meetings with staff that don't need to happen in an open cabin, etc. 757 may fit the bill for a lot of it, but a G might be a little small for much of it.

Marginal cost for 747 v many other expenditures is pretty slim - just the most visibly ostentatious. I would rather have a well rested, overly connected, and overly protected POTUS than save a couple million.

That said, if I was running things, I'm with you and I'd have my own F22

 

No other leader is running a current super power, but Putin has similar capabilities. In this day of the internet, things change to fast for POTUS to be cut off from the world for the duration of a cross country commercial flight. Can cut back on a ton of the luxuries, although they are not that much different than many of the Fortune 50 CEO's. We can't safely cut back on the capabilities.

 

There are smaller twin engine jets that are used by POTUS for short domestic flights. They occasionally use a 757, and on rare occasions have used a G550 designated a C-37B

 

I don't think he should take the airlines, but there aren't any Fortune 50 CEOs running around in 747s, either. For international travel, the 747 probably makes sense, but not really for domestic travel.

 

As I stated, theyh do send him around in smaller aircraft from time to time, although that is often due to the capabilities of the destination airport as much as anything else. But, remember, part of the reason they travel with the 747 is for its capabilities in the case of a true emergency, it really is a mobile command center that will be critical on those rare occasions it is needed. And while there are no American CEO's flying around in 747's, there are a few in the middle east and asia. Most CEOs also are not accompanied by a security and support entourage of 40-100 folks plus press in tow.

 

American CEOs with 747s. There are 2 I know of. One of those recently purchased an A340.

Air Force One carries quite a support group. Beyond that are the advance teams that fly to the location prior to arrival with people, limos, support cars and other equipment depending upon the location.

On board AF1:

President quarters
Presidential office
Conference room
Secretarial support
White House staffers
Invited guests
Secret Service
Press
Air Force Security - they are in charge of protecting the aircraft
Communications

The concept is that the president can function with their inner circle of advisors and staff the same as if they were inside the White House.

The replacement for the current 747-200s will be 747-8s. There may be a side show for a while to make it look like others were considered but that will be just an act. 3+ engines and in current production will make there be only one qualifying candidate.

Jeff

 

I know there are people that own 747s, but Fortune 50 public companies?

I wouldn't count the casino airplanes as "CEO" transportation, even if the CEO rides in them once in a while...

 

So it should sit on the ground for 6 months till the next trip? They are going to fly them montly anyway just to stay current.

Plus with all that was added tot he last two they needed a gross weigth increase just to be able to fly.

 

This is the issue. In a 2 engine plane if you lose one it is an emergency. You set max continuous on the good engine, descend to the single engine altitude and land. With a four engine plane it is still a problem but in all reality the airplane could continue to fly for hours. The other capability the AF 1 needs is air refueling. Don't think any of the 75s or 73s have this capability.

 

The last thing we need are more shows of false modesty of the sort imposed on the Detroit CEOs after they dared to fly corporate jets (gasp!) to testify before Congress. We were in the midst of a financial emergency and much of the committee's time - and almost all of the public's attention - was squandered with fake outrage over the equivalent of a rounding error. Some meetings really are important enough to fire up the Gulfstream.

I would argue that unlike the papacy (which is about as imperial as it gets), the American presidency is important enough to warrant a fully-staffed mobile office.

 

I fully agree. Having lived and worked in other parts of the world I well know that how you arrive says a lot. With cars someone ina Golf just ownt get the same cred and respect as someone in a limo.

I have been to buisness mettings in Africa where the person showing up in a BBJ got far more cred than the ones showing up in a G5 and comercial didnt even geta seat at the table. If we(USA) want to be respected a certain way we need to act it and present ourselvs that way. Impressions really do count.

Plus if you look at all the equipment that is on the -200's its going to take someting at elast 400 sized to run the mission.

The VP and nancy can go on the 757's.

Now should the -200 be used fto fly from say DC to FL, why not, its got to be flowna certain number of hours anyway, and most likely there are lots of practice flights just to keep the hours up.

If we start acting like an impoverished euro state, say the UK then that is what we will be.

Rememebr whent he royal yacht used to show up, what a statement that made.

Ithe president is the most pwerful

 

If I remember right, Nancy ordered the plane when she was still majority leader... And about the same time as the Detroit CEO nonsense... Boehner said soon after taking that post that he would fly on something smaller or commercial, and not the 757... So does it just sit now? I imagine that not any House member can use it... Also, don't lots of Gulfstreams and other reasonable private aircraft make the DC/SFO trip?

Very few companies actually own big business jets (excluding arab sheiks who have CEO titles, casinos for clients, etc...).. I'm sure they get used, but likely on charter.. Due to all the internal rules, most 'senior staffs' aren't allowed on the same flight as each other, so 2 smaller planes are taken vs. one big one... I've heard stories of a CEO and COO flying to DC, each sitting by themselves on Challenger 600s flying a few minutes apart...

 

There were and are multiple 757s in the Air Force VIP fleet. They are most typically the lane of choice for the VP, Secretary of State and other highest cabinet members. Up until Pelosi it was not used by the Speaker of the House. She demanded that the Air Force use the 757 to transport her and whatever retinue she had to the Bay Area. Any of the Air Force Gulfstreams would make that flight without any problem. It was outrageous that she forced this issue and got away with it.

As for corporate Boeings in the US. Yes, a bunch. Mostly with privately held corporations or those run by the founder, but not all.

The rules, if any, on executives of the same company flying together is strictly a company by company policy.

Jeff

 

Correct. Also used in theatre by senior military. As I recall, she more often used the C-40 (737), long extant prior to her tenure as speaker. It wasn't used regularly for Hastert (predecessor) because he was first speaker to get milair (due to line of succession issues following 9/11), and he could get to Chicago on smaller aircraft.

Nor can the speaker "order" a plane for the Air Force.

 

The G3's owned by the DOD told the house Sargent at arms that that aircraft may need to stop for fuel during winter headwinds. they needed an airplane that would not have to stop and the decision by DOD was the 757.

 

Whomever it was that said that the G3 would have difficulty making the coast-to-coast flight was either lying, completely ignorant or using a freak occurrence as their justification. G-IIIs make that run without any difficulty all the time.

She did not need the 757 and she certainly did not deserve it.

 

Whether she deserved it or not she was 2 lives away from being president and requires either a big security escort on commercial or her own aircraft. it was not her decision.

 

Multiple POTUS have done official travel on the G-IIIs, G-IVs and G-Vs with the retinue of security and communications people necessary. When any of them hit the ground there are local Secret Service to meet them.

She made a point of wanting the 757 that are more regularly used by the VP and the highest ranking of the cabinet. NO Speaker of the House had ever had this perk.

She wasn't going to fly commercial, it would be one of the Air Force aircraft from the 89th MAC at Andrews.

 

Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly told FactCheck.org that the speaker does have access to military air travel. When she flies to her home district, she uses whatever Air Force craft is available. Daly told us that "they try to do a nonstop flight." But the plane Pelosi uses most often is the C-20B, and she has occasionally used even smaller planes. According to Daly, Pelosi once used the C-32 when no other planes were available, but she also has had to stop for refueling on at least one trip on a smaller aircraft. Pelosi’s family has traveled with her a few times, but they had to reimburse the government for the cost of their tickets, as stipulated in the Pentagon’s letter. Congress members who are traveling to California sometimes do the same. Pelosi only uses the jet to travel between Washington, D.C., and San Francisco on official business. For any other trip, she and her family use commercial airlines.

Update, December 22: After this story was posted, we received word from Eric Sharman, deputy chief of public affairs at Andrews Air Force Base, confirming what Pelosi’s spokesman told us about her aircraft use. Sharman said that Pelosi has in the past used the C-20B and the slightly larger C-37A, depending on availability, and that these may or may not be able to make a nonstop cross-country flight depending on conditions. He confirms that Pelosi has used the C-32 once and only once, when no other planes were available.

Update, March 23: The Web site Judicial Watch has made public e-mails to and from the Department of Defense regarding Pelosi’s travel requests. The conservative organization claims the e-mails show that Pelosi has made “unreasonable requests for military travel.” These e-mails, however, back up what we were told by Pelosi’s staff and by the Air Force, i.e., that Pelosi did not usually travel on the C-32 and that any family members or other members of Congress she brought with her on flights to her home district were asked to reimburse the cost of a coach ticket. The messages are about smaller planes, not the 757-size jet. Also, most of the e-mails are not about shuttles to and from Pelosi’s home district at all, but are about congressional delegations to other states and countries. Pelosi’s office oversees transportation for these trips for all members of the House, not just the speaker. For a little more detail on the Judicial Watch-released e-mails, see our post on the FactCheck Wire, "Plane False."

Also, we originally said the C-32 seats 50. But an Air Force fact sheet, while showing that it has 50 seats, says that it seats 45. We are resolving this contradiction in favor of the lower number.

- Jess Henig