New Air Force One Plans Being Finalized with Boeing

-U.S. Air Force hopes to strikes deal with Boeing for new plane next month
-Officials plan to replace the current 747-200B model with a 747-8 by 2023
-Initial estimates budget $102m this year and another $3bn in the next five
-New model will be bigger, more cost-efficient, with fewer carbon emissions

Story Link

a reply to: AtomicMod



Hopefully I'll get to see this roll out before the finishing touches are built into her.

a reply to: Sammamishman

She's a beauty, that's for sure

Sorry but HOW MUCH! 3 Billion over 5 years for essentially a customised 747
with a nice communications suite and some ECM!

Ok i get that its a flying command n control and its a status symbol for the US
and the office of POTUS but that seems insanely expensive.

is that just build cost or total running?

in today's economy would it not make more sense and set an example
stick with the current aircraft i would assume being what it is
i would imagine its in absolute top condition. and i would also assume
its "custom" equipment is also the best available.

a reply to: ShayneJUK

The current aircraft are 747-200s, and are from the days of the first Bush presidency. They're old, and almost the last examples of the -200 series flying. That means parts availability is getting worse and worse. Eventually they won't have any parts left that they can get.

Even aircraft in top condition are going to break. No matter how hard you try they're going to break.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ShayneJUK

The current aircraft are 747-200s, and are from the days of the first Bush presidency. They're old, and almost the last examples of the -200 series flying. That means parts availability is getting worse and worse. Eventually they won't have any parts left that they can get.

Even aircraft in top condition are going to break. No matter how hard you try they're going to break.

Yes, sir, but those old B-52s are still at it as are others aren't they with upgrade after upgrade.

a reply to: Zaphod58

indeed i know they are elderly as 747's go but still as Aliensun says the USAF seems to manage to keep
the old B52's operational and they are much older even so how much is a fresh off the line 747.8 prior to its
fleet seating fit out? i know the AF1 jet is very different inside but 3 billion different ?

a reply to: ShayneJUK

Here is a good article that explains the dilemma and the rules around a president buying new jets.

There are large amounts of spare parts in the bone yard for the B-52's and this is one of the main reasons why we can keep flying them today. The 747-200 parts supply is drying up and some parts have had to been re-made to fill the need. That is getting more costly as years go by and the process for building a new VC-25 is not an overnight process.
The cost of the jet it'self is the cheep part, it's the guts and engineering work that goes into them that make the cost per aircraft so high. There are also significant cost savings with the new jets (dollar per hour operations) than the current models that will help ease the initial funding blow a little.

www.defenseone.com...

a reply to: AtomicMod

You'd think they would go for the Dreamliner, though the 747 look is iconic with Airforce one.

They will put old ones in museum or something. If I were president I would sell them to UK or Canada or something to help pay for new ones.

a reply to: DrumStickNinja

The Dream Liner doesn't have enough floor space for the gear and the passengers it needs to carry. The decision for a new jet came down to the 747-8 or an A380. The 747 was really the only logical choice to them.

a reply to: ShayneJUK

That cost is for a minimum of two planes, as well. Not to mention the state of the art defensive countermeasures, EMP shielding and airborne command center capabilities that AF-1 requires

a reply to: Sammamishman

thanks for the link i'll have a read later

yes i should have realised i know the AF has quite a parts stockpile for the 52 fleet

then i realised just how old the 200 is and there are few others still around to cannibalise
i appreciate the nature of a lot of the hardware installed but i still seems an immense amount of cash
to invest in one or two aircraft even as unique as this.

a reply to: Aliensun

B-52s were purpose built for the profile they fly and the mission they do. They're built stronger than commercial aircraft, and don't undergo the same stresses. A B-52 doesn't have the same stress that a cycle puts on a 747, so they last longer. You're comparing apples and watermelons.

a reply to: ShayneJUK

That's the cost of two airframes at several hundred million each, plus modifications that cost almost as much as the airframe, and that before you add the self defense suite and other classified systems on it. Air Force One makes a normal 747 look like a totally different aircraft.

a reply to: DrumStickNinja

You wouldn't believe how much equipment goes on a VC bird. The Gulfstream V, once all the equipment is installed has its range cut almost in half because of all the weight of the equipment.

Air Force One adds about four times the equipment without adding things like the OR, stairs, and baggage handling equipment that makes it self sufficient.

I wonder will this new one eventually get a laser defense cannon? Too bad they cant desing in a remote cut off switch in it. INcase you know someone hijacks it. NO then the CIA would be tempted to do naughty things again liek in Texas and kennedy.

a reply to: Sammamishman

I think for most missions the POTUS can sufficiently be transported on a C-32. I've always found AF1 to be exuberant, personally. International visits with a large detail of vehicles, security and press - both VC-25s and a Globemaster in tow, sure I get it. But DC to NYC for a UN event? Complete waste of resources...just me?