Replacement for Air Force One.

L1011

AMKC wrote: »

I wonder what will happen the current one. Will it be like the Beast and all broke down and stripped so no one can find out about its secrets? A pity really.

There's two, not one, airframes currently in use.

The previous set ended up in museums, and indeed both of them continued to be used occasionally even after the 747s were delivered. There's an even earlier model in the Museum of Flight in Seattle.

Stealthirl

They never used the inflight refueling on the current ones

Proponents of the cut argue that aerial refueling is not necessary considering no president has ever used the capability, not even George W. Bush who loitered over the Gulf of Mexico in Air Force One for eight hours after the 9/11 attacks.

California Dreamer

Wait till you see if Biden wins he will change the colour back to blue.

Tenger

California Dreamer wrote: »

Wait till you see if Biden wins he will change the colour back to blue.

That gets my vote. The Trump designed livery is very similar to his own B757.
The silver, white and blue just looks classy in my opinion.

I visited the B707 variant (VC-137C) that is in Museum of Flight in Seattle. Interior is very 1960s.
The guide told me that it was in use up to 1990 (I think) flying Secretary of State level people around.
(Excellent museum BTW)

L1011

Tenger wrote: »

(Excellent museum BTW)

The quality of the exhibits is only beaten by the quality of the staff & volunteers. There's a culture in the US of museum volunteers even in commercial museums, even an odd German term sort of misappropriated for it - docent - that's used in some places.

The day I was there, one of the volunteers working at the Concorde steps was a very, very old Boeing engineer who'd worked on the 747 project with Sutter and was one of the earlier senior black engineers in Boeing - they'd been segregated til nearly the end of WWII and hired very few black staff for a fair while after.

He'd done some form of testing on something - I honestly can't remember what now - at Shannon in the 70s and 80s, I'd guess possibly early 767 stuff.


Entire thing is a little Boeing Boeing Boeing Rah Rah Rah as you'd expect with it being in Seattle but its well worth a visit. Just make sure the restoration division in Everett/PAE is open before you drive up there - I ended up doing the Boeing factory tour to save a wasted journey!

Board Walker

Didn't Obama set the wheels in motion to get 2 x 747-8's to replace the current but Trump cancelled them as the cost was in excess of 4 billion?

Davidth88

Interesting alright , the current ones are getting pretty long in the tooth.

I remember 26000 and 27000 ( the VC137 ( B707 )) visiting LHR back in the day.

Was also at Pima where the VC118 is which is really worth a visit if you are down that neck of the woods.

Lockheed

Board Walker wrote: »

Didn't Obama set the wheels in motion to get 2 x 747-8's to replace the current but Trump cancelled them as the cost was in excess of 4 billion?

Trump organised a deal for two 748s from Boeing when the Russian airline Transaero collapsed and so probably saved some money over buying new, its still going to cost an arm and a leg to fit them for SS and the president etc

Tenger

Lockheed wrote: »

Trump organised a deal for two 748s from Boeing when the Russian airline Transaero collapsed and so probably saved some money over buying new, its still going to cost an arm and a leg to fit them for SS and the president etc

He also threatened to cancel if they didn't lower the price.
I think someone pointed out earlier that they removed the air to air refueling capability to reduce cost.

AMKC

Tenger wrote: »

He also threatened to cancel if they didn't lower the price.
I think someone pointed out earlier that they removed the air to air refueling capability to reduce cost.

Yes they did indeed. Good or bad is another thing. What sort of range has the current one got? Is it 5 thousand miles. I would expect the new one to have longer range but still think no refueling capability on it is crazy.

HTCOne

Another issue is what do they replace the E-4s with? They’re designed to remain airborne for a week or more. An engine failure on a 747 isn’t even often an emergency (I’ve had 3 747s in my sector with an engine failure over the years that continued to destination). With no more 4 holers in production, they’ll either have to go for a new build twin or buy up a few used B744 / B748, the latter of which is only operated by Lufthansa, KAL and Air China IIRC.

Although I’ve often read there’s an undelivered 747-8 in a desert somewhere in the states, Lufthansa refused to take delivery of it due some weight and balance issues? Obviously no use as an E4 replacement on its own.

Lockheed

AMKC wrote: »

Yes they did indeed. Good or bad is another thing. What sort of range has the current one got? Is it 5 thousand miles. I would expect the new one to have longer range but still think no refueling capability on it is crazy.

The air to air refuelling capability was never used on the current VC-25s, think it was mentioned before, considering the range the -8i has I don't see air to air fuelling being needed

Tenger

Looking at the wiki page it shows 1 pax variant delivered to an "unidentified customer"
Lufty have 19
Korean Air have 10
Air China have 7.
8 in business/VIP config.

Apart from the 2 for the POTUS all the rest are cargo variants.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747-8

Lockheed

Lockheed wrote: »

The air to air refuelling capability was never used on the current VC-25s, think it was mentioned before, considering the range the -8i has I don't see air to air fuelling being needed

Ultimately range will be determined by final fit out. Hopefully Trump doesn't get to choose it or it will be full of marble and gold and will barely be able to get to the end of the runway.

john boye

HTCOne wrote: »

Although I’ve often read there’s an undelivered 747-8 in a desert somewhere in the states, Lufthansa refused to take delivery of it due some weight and balance issues? Obviously no use as an E4 replacement on its own.

It was the first built 8i and was used extensively for tests etc. It was supposed to go to Lufty when Boeing were done with it but they rejected it like you said and it's just been in the desert for years now.

HTCOne

john boye wrote: »

It was the first built 8i and was used extensively for tests etc. It was supposed to go to Lufty when Boeing were done with it but they rejected it like you said and it's just been in the desert for years now.

Thanks for that. I believe there was another 8i undelivered until last year, as whatever Arab royal who ordered it died before he took delivery, and what Sheikh wants a jet with an interior specced by someone else? Someone else took it up eventually anyway. I seem to remember the Qatari royal family gifting a few VIP configured ones to Turkey and Morocco in recent years too.

AMKC

HTCOne wrote: »

Another issue is what do they replace the E-4s with? They’re designed to remain airborne for a week or more. An engine failure on a 747 isn’t even often an emergency (I’ve had 3 747s in my sector with an engine failure over the years that continued to destination). With no more 4 holers in production, they’ll either have to go for a new build twin or buy up a few used B744 / B748, the latter of which is only operated by Lufthansa, KAL and Air China IIRC.

Although I’ve often read there’s an undelivered 747-8 in a desert somewhere in the states, Lufthansa refused to take delivery of it due some weight and balance issues? Obviously no use as an E4 replacement on its own.

What are E4s?

Unknownability

AMKC wrote: »

What are E4s?

The Doomsday plane, they were in the media recently when Trump was diagnosed with Covid as they tried to make out they were scrambled as a display of force.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-4

AMKC

Unknownability wrote: »

The Doomsday plane, they were in the media recently when Trump was diagnosed with Covid as they tried to make out they were scrambled as a display of force.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-4

Wow! I am genuinely surprised. I honestly never knew or heard of these before. That's mad.

smurfjed

I believe there was another 8i undelivered until last year, as whatever Arab royal who ordered it died before he took delivery, and what Sheikh wants a jet with an interior specced by someone else?

The aircraft was purchased by HRH Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz AlSaud, it was supposed to be HZ-HMS1 (HMS2 is a A340) he died before it was delivered, the aircraft was ferried to Jet Aviation in Basel where i last saw it in March. It has no interior, but there aren’t too many buyers of $400,000,000 aircraft with the ability to spend that same amount on the interior.

Considering that the E4 would be completely retrofitted, the additional weight of the test aircraft may not be an issue.

smurfjed

smurfjed wrote: »

The aircraft was purchased by HRH Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz AlSaud, it was supposed to be HZ-HMS1 (HMS2 is a A340) he died before it was delivered, the aircraft was ferried to Jet Aviation in Basel where i last saw it in March. It has no interior, but there aren’t too many buyers of $400,000,000 aircraft with the ability to spend that same amount on the interior.

Considering that the E4 would be completely retrofitted, the additional weight of the test aircraft may not be an issue.

The sooner we break the dependence on Middle East oil the better. Sickening stuff spending $800 on a private plane considering what they are doing to their Yemeni neighbours (unicef describe it as the largest humanitarian crisis in the world with 14 million people facing starvation)

Davidth88

AMKC wrote: »

What are E4s?

Where ever the POTUS is these aircraft follow.

I remember the then current president ( I think Reagan ) was visiting the UK back in the 80s , spent a happy day at Fairford where there was I think 6 KC10 , various other aircraft and an E4 and about 3000 spotters like myself .

HTCOne

smurfjed wrote: »

Considering that the E4 would be completely retrofitted, the additional weight of the test aircraft may not be an issue.

True. There are currently 4 E4s in service, so even with the undelivered Lufthansa and Saudi royal frames, that would still need another 2 ex passenger frames to be picked up. Lufthansa in particular are renowned for maintaining their aircraft to the absolute highest standard, but I wonder if they would take used airframes from a foreign country.

When I think of it, given their respective role, I’d think the E4 replacement having 4 engines is more important than the VC25s.

Tenger

In fairness I think the conversion to VC-25/E-4 configuration is almost a strip and rebuild of the airframe.
The USAF would gave very little qualms over the costs required.

California Dreamer

Mayo_fan wrote: »

The sooner we break the dependence on Middle East oil the better. Sickening stuff spending $800 on a private plane considering what they are doing to their Yemeni neighbours (unicef describe it as the largest humanitarian crisis in the world with 14 million people facing starvation)

I think you have come to wrong place to peddle that stuff. You are in an aviation forum. So shiny jets costing billions is what we are interested in. We don't get into the politics here.

knucklehead6

And as predicted, Biden has scrapped the paint job.

smurfjed

And it appears that the Saudi jet was sold for scrap, ferried to the USA and purchased by Boeing. While it is a 12 year old plane, it has only test and ferry flight hours.

HTCOne

What a waste.