Air Force One aborts a landing....executes a missed approach

[Boris Badenov]

In any Democracy that's functioning halfway correctly, the head of state can be killed and it's not Anarchy and the End of The World. Of course, in a Democracy that's functioning halfway correctly, you probably wouldn't have 75% of the world gunning for you, either. Shades of the Roman Emperors who travelled with entire Legions for "security".

 

[Rotor2Wing]

It won't be soon and Boeing has already presented a proposal for the 747-8i as a replacement. It would take some time (years) to add/incorporate all of the special modifications needed to any aircraft. The 8 already has the engine and wing technologies of the 787 anyways. Boeing has also come up with a performance package upgrade and some other improved modifications for her also that would fit in well.

Thrust vectoring and super-cruise??

 

[A Life Aloft]

Thrust vectoring and super-cruise??

Close! lmao Some of the improvements are in aerodynamics and weights. A "performance improvement package" (the PIP) and one PIP is for the airplane’s new General Electric GEnx-2B turbofans. It will include a new low-pressure turbine design, redesigned high-pressure compressor airfoils, as well as an “upgraded” combustor and improved high-pressure turbine aerodynamics, and would gain certification in the second quarter of 2013, according to GE’s schedules.

Also, another update to the FMC from Honeywell, an improved navigational performance (RNP), and that allows for just a little more efficient approaches and some other functionality improvements (3rd upgrade I believe to the FMC), a little more opportunity for operational advantages and also a software solution to certify tail fuel tanks that were meant to hold another 3,300 gallons of jet-A in the Intercontinental. Computer simulation testing showed that the airplane would experience some minor structural flutter in the event of a failure of the R3 under-wing, mid-spar strut-to-wing fitting, one of six connecting the outboard engines to the wing, when the tanks held more than 15 percent of their capacity. As a result, Boeing had to decommission the fuel tanks to gain certification of the variant last December. The tanks will raise the 747-8’s total fuel capacity to 64,055 gallons, extending its range from roughly 7,650 to 8,000 nm. (The 747-8 Freighter does not use those tanks).

Boeing plans to fit a single instrumented flight test airplane with the complete PIP, the FMC improvements, the engine modifications and the tail tank reactivation for simultaneous certification before the end of next year. The engine PIP alone should bring performance to within 1% of specification, while aerodynamic upgrades and weight reductions will account for much of the balance. Designed to operate 15% more efficiently than its GE-powered 747-400, the 747-8 relies largely on a new supercritical wing for its performance benefits. The engine, meanwhile, represents fifth-generation technology and resists deterioration over time far better than its precursors, translating into better midlife performance and less cost/maintenance issues.

Next up......enemy radar detection, deflect, jam or offset radar-controlled approaching missile systems, flares and chaff. lol Seriously, I think the 8 would be a super choice for AF One.

 

[Murdoughnut]

It won't be soon and Boeing has already presented a proposal for the 747-8i as a replacement. It would take some time (years) to add/incorporate all of the special modifications needed to any aircraft. The 8 already has the engine and wing technologies of the 787 anyways. Boeing has also come up with a performance package upgrade and some other improved modifications for her also that would fit in well.

Plus it seems convenient to have all of the comms people on the upper deck.

 

[A Life Aloft]

Plus it seems convenient to have all of the comms people on the upper deck.

The space and configuration possibilities with the 747-8 as opposed to the Dreamliner are a huge consideration. The AF is more likely to go with the known and proven tradition. The upper deck is lengthened also on the 8i. Boeing has and is still kicking around a variant 787 if the AF is interested, but I don't really see that happening. It would also be much more cost effective to modify the 8 with the known equipment on the current VC-25s. Boeing already has the sources (contractors/partners) in place to upgrade everything in the way of communication, defense etc., requirements and I imagine it would be built at the Wichita plant as well. It's just such an iconic beauty.

You gotta admit...this looks pretty sweet

 

[I_Money]

The leader of Singapore buys tickets on scheduled Singapore Air flights.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

The leader of Singapore buys tickets on scheduled Singapore Air flights.

If I were President, I would fly [insert mainline carrier du jour here or their Express or Connection equivalents].

Incidentally, I once had Governor Rick Perry in the back of my EMB, and had no idea who the guy was until someone from Premium Services stuck their head up on the flight deck and said "the Governor of Texas is on board; have a nice flight." *shrugs* He was just a regular guy dressed casually...with two armed guards with him.

 

[MikeD]

The space and configuration possibilities with the 747-8 as opposed to the Dreamliner are a huge consideration. The AF is more likely to go with the known and proven tradition. The upper deck is lengthened also on the 8i. Boeing has and is still kicking around a variant 787 if the AF is interested, but I don't really see that happening. It would also be much more cost effective to modify the 8 with the known equipment on the current VC-25s. Boeing already has the sources (contractors/partners) in place to upgrade everything in the way of communication, defense etc., requirements and I imagine it would be built at the Wichita plant as well. It's just such an iconic beauty.

You gotta admit...this looks pretty sweet

View attachment 21842

While I could easily see an Airbus having been used for the next generation air refueling tanker, which would've been the KC-45; I can't see a foreign product being selected for transport of the US President. In that vein, I fully agree with you about the AF going with an known and proven tradition. Just look at what happened with the presidential helicopter replacement recently for Marine One that got cancelled: It was supposed to be the VH-71, which was going to be Lockheed-Martins's Americanized version of a British helicopter, the Westland EH-101. While cost was cited by the Obama administration as a factor in its cancellation, I have to wonder if the foriegn aspect may have played a role in the decision? As is, the Sikorsky VH-3A still soldiers on as the primary Marine One, with the VH-60s as backup.

Going to a 747-8 for Air Force One would be pretty neat.

As you remember, Gerry, Air Force One and Two 747s were converted during the Bush41 administration. I've always wondered why the AF didn't go with the 747-400 at the time? I believe that although the -400s were just coming online around that time, it should've (could've) meshed well with when the new AF1/2 were being converted. Any idea why the AF went with the -200?

 

[A Life Aloft]

Hey Mike, I believe that the AF had already placed the orders for 5 of the 200's during the time frame of the orders for the new AF Ones in the mid 80's and the 400 didn't hit service until February of '89. (I think NWA got the first one up-UAL got theirs a few months later - in your fave livery the Saul Bass ) One of the modified classics was used to ferry the shuttle around, 4 of the 200's (designated as E-4's) were/are used as airborne emergency command control posts and 2 additional airframes were ordered, built and modified for new AF Ones. Plus in '89 and '90 Boeing also modified around 20 of the 100's for them which were relegated to CRAF, to be used/converted as freighters.

I think it was just the timing of the orders...i.e. availability and "newness" of the 400's coming on line and for what ever reason(s) the AF did not want to wait for them, and I believe that the two new/upgraded/current AF Ones were actually ordered in 1986, and it took some time to modify them and build in all the special defense and communication equipment, accommodations, upgrades etc. One was manufactured in 1987 and the second in 1989 and then began the testing phase for all the special equipment and modifications began. They didn't actually go into service until 1990 (the aircraft built in '87) and 1991 (the one built in '89), however.

They both though, do incorporate some features of the 300 and 400 series. I believe for instance that the landing gear is from the 300 and while they don't have the engines of the 400, they do have a newer upgraded engines from the original 200's and are using the CF6-80C2B1s (the 400 has the CF6-80C2B1Fs) and they have some of the upgraded avionics of the 400. But unique to them are the two lower cargo doors on both sides of the fuselage and the duel APUs. Plus the AF wanted a a navigator's station added to the cockpit for an FE who is also an AF pilot, so they fly with a three man crew upfront.

And yeah I can't imagine anything but Boeing being used for AF Ones and I am fairly sure it will be the 8i. A budget has already been submitted by Boeing to the AF but I imagine the upgrades that the AF wants now would be interesting from many standpoints and you know budgets....much like first wives...the price just keeps going up. lol I had forgotten about the Marine One idea and I also doubt that budgetary concerns were an issue in this case either.

 

[MikeD]

Thats interesting stuff. Yes, I do remember that the flightcrew does include a Navigator in addition to the two pilots and FE. On AF1/2, the lower cargo doors also have incorporated stairs too, correct? Supposedly, AF1 also travels with it's own maintenance people as well as common spare parts. Have never seen a VC-25 or heard of one ever needing something major on the road maintenance-wise, such as an engine change or something.

And AF1/2 have -400 style avionics, in that they're glass cockpits?

How would you like to try your hand at air-to-air refueling, like the VC-25 and E-4s do?

Im with you, in that I think Boeing has the lock on the Air Force One aircraft. I know the VC-25 aircraft are obviously kept in immaculate condition, but I do wonder how they're doing on their airframe life/hours, with all the travel and cycles they encounter.

 

[A Life Aloft]

I should have been more specific, it is not all the glass displays like the 400 at all, but is modified with some of glass installed. (just fixed my post above to say "some") Still has many dials and gauges. Has EADI and EHSI also. And yes, the two lower cargo doors do have stairs.

I cannot fathom two planes on the planet that are as meticulously gone over, scrutinized and as well maintained than the AF Ones are. They have their own teams of specialized AF mechanics who comb over every inch of them on an ongoing basis. For the age of the airframes, the cycles and hours are still pretty low, I would think. I believe it's all managed out of Tinker isn't it? It's way beyond just mechanics, they have an entire teams of engineers, program managers, equipment specialists, the maintaining of the support equipment and spare parts at various locations like Andrews, plus they are always modifying and upgrading the equipment on board in the cockpit and in other centers on the aircraft. I know too that Boeing in Wichita, does a lot of the work with them on the planes. One of them was there for like a year getting upgrades, FAA certs/inspections, refurbishments, modifications and who knows what all, not long ago. One of them cycles in and out of the Wichita facility every year. Must be a helluva lot of people on these teams. There is even a flight manual manager.

Air refueling....ha I can't imagine the aircraft I could damage doing that!!! lmao You are talking to someone who dropped a tiny binder clip down alongside the seat of the King, reached down with my fingers in the track (well one of them) and then proceeded to then move/slide the seat over said finger to try and grab the clip. That is only one of my many special talents.

You might know, but what exactly does CRAF use the freighters (the 100's) for???

 

[ASpilot2be]

If they are going to get the -8s, they need to get the reliability improved. They are absolute maintenance hogs.

 

[Douglas]

If I were President, I would fly [insert mainline carrier du jour here or their Express or Connection equivalents].

Incidentally, I once had Governor Rick Perry in the back of my EMB, and had no idea who the guy was until someone from Premium Services stuck their head up on the flight deck and said "the Governor of Texas is on board; have a nice flight." *shrugs* He was just a regular guy dressed casually...with two armed guards with him.

 

[MikeD]

I

I cannot fathom two planes on the planet that are as meticulously gone over, scrutinized and as well maintained than the AF Ones are. They have their own teams of specialized AF mechanics who comb over every inch of them on an ongoing basis. For the age of the airframes, the cycles and hours are still pretty low, I would think. I believe it's all managed out of Tinker isn't it? It's way beyond just mechanics, they have an entire teams of engineers, program managers, equipment specialists, the maintaining of the support equipment and spare parts at various locations like Andrews, plus they are always modifying and upgrading the equipment on board in the cockpit and in other centers on the aircraft. I know too that Boeing in Wichita, does a lot of the work with them on the planes. One of them was there for like a year getting upgrades, FAA certs/inspections, refurbishments, modifications and who knows what all, not long ago. One of them cycles in and out of the Wichita facility every year. Must be a helluva lot of people on these teams. There is even a flight manual manager.

Im not sure which depot does the E-4/VC-25 series, although Tinker would make sense. However for each jet, the security requirements would be pretty huge. I say that because the two NASA shuttle-carrier 747s are based at Pinal Airpark (MZJ) right next to where I live at the former Evergreen facility, and even though they were on the Evergreen ramp, there was a specialized crew that worked on them and only certain people cleared to board them.

The E-4 is interesting, because wherever it goes.....and it's always somewhere roughly near where AF1 is located.......it parks on the ramp and has its APU running 24/7, with its onboard systems running 24/7 and always manned with a partial crew when parked. On the road, its never shut down and buttoned up....it's always ready to go. And the on-base "alert route" signs are posted for the aircrew to be able to rush to the aircraft from wherever on base, if they get an alert launch.

You might know, but what exactly does CRAF use the freighters (the 100's) for???

Various cargo, from what Ive seen. When I was overseas this last time, at the main base we were at, there was always 1 to 3 747s on the ramp.....Kalitta, Southern Air, etc, delivering all sorts of cargo to the base.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Operationally, having the Governor of Texas on board wasn't a big deal other than the guys packin' heat.

(Remember that I actually live in the Democratic Shiny Happy Hipster People's Republic of California, and so would not likely know the Governor of Texas's voice or face despite being at the time DFW-based.)

 

[pete2800]

I heard they were planning to replace the 747 with a 787 soon.

I hope not...

My father is working on that thing at Boeing. He says he won't step foot on the first 100 airframes, with the horror he's seen from the manufacturing side. And with what I've heard, I wouldn't either.

 

[MikeD]

I hope not...

My father is working on that thing at Boeing. He says he won't step foot on the first 100 airframes, with the horror he's seen from the manufacturing side. And with what I've heard, I wouldn't either.

Can you elaborate?

 

[smack300]

I hope not...

My father is working on that thing at Boeing. He says he won't step foot on the first 100 airframes, with the horror he's seen from the manufacturing side. And with what I've heard, I wouldn't either.

Can you elaborate?

Yea dude you can't leave us on that cliff hanger!

 

[MercFE]

Im not sure which depot does the E-4/VC-25 series, although Tinker would make sense. However for each jet, the security requirements would be pretty huge. I say that because the two NASA shuttle-carrier 747s are based at Pinal Airpark (MZJ) right next to where I live at the former Evergreen facility, and even though they were on the Evergreen ramp, there was a specialized crew that worked on them and only certain people cleared to board them.

The E-4 is interesting, because wherever it goes.....and it's always somewhere roughly near where AF1 is located.......it parks on the ramp and has its APU running 24/7, with its onboard systems running 24/7 and always manned with a partial crew when parked. On the road, its never shut down and buttoned up....it's always ready to go. And the on-base "alert route" signs are posted for the aircrew to be able to rush to the aircraft from wherever on base, if they get an alert launch.

Have never seen either the AF1/2 or E-4s are Tinker... Most of the maintenance I know of for the E-4's is carried out at Offutt. However, other than seeing AF1/2 there for Pres visits, I've never seen them there for any maintenance. Makes sense that Tinker might support equipment repair, however.

Touring the E-4 is definitely an interesting opportunity. Sometimes I wish we took some of their alert procedures and put them into out system. However, it is quite a drain of manpower to have a jet running 24/7, just in case. Maintainers can be utilized in a much better manner than watching DVDs and playing Xbox in the crew rest area.

 

[SteveCostello]

However, it is quite a drain of manpower to have a jet running 24/7, just in case. Maintainers can be utilized in a much better manner than watching DVDs and playing Xbox in the crew rest area.

So, completely naïve question here. How long does it really take to get a 747 ready to roll? If it was plugged into shore power, all systems up, would you not be able to fire up the APU, get the jets spinning, and GTFO in not much more time than it takes now?