US Air Force One Replacement - President-Elect Trump's View
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,047
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
Reagan?
I could totally understand the problems Boeing are having with cost, as mentioned before a friend was involved with the cancelled helicopter contract and they were getting stuff like
"We need to fit something in the avionics bay"
"What does it do?"
"Classified"
"What size it it?"
"Classified"
What power does it need?"
"Classified"
"What does it weigh."
"Classified"
And so it went on.
I could totally understand the problems Boeing are having with cost, as mentioned before a friend was involved with the cancelled helicopter contract and they were getting stuff like
"We need to fit something in the avionics bay"
"What does it do?"
"Classified"
"What size it it?"
"Classified"
What power does it need?"
"Classified"
"What does it weigh."
"Classified"
And so it went on.
Nutloose, you're spot on.
According to Av Week (Trump Vows To 'Negotiate' Price Of Boeing's New Air Force One | Ares)
Think about that for a moment - ~$3 Billion in R&D - the actual aircraft are on top of that! 
Boeing lost over $250 million building the current VC-25A aircraft - as noted earlier some of that was due to a poor program management, but much of it was underestimating the work required to meet the USAF requirements (adding things like dual APUs, aerial refueling, and EMP hardening to a passenger aircraft doesn't come cheap
)
As noted, I know more than I can say about the new aircraft requirements but if the USAF gets everything they are asking for, little more than the airframe structure will be common with a 747-8i. As I noted before, I was stunned at the level of system redesign that will be needed to meet the AF1 requirements - and that was just for the engines...
According to Av Week (Trump Vows To 'Negotiate' Price Of Boeing's New Air Force One | Ares)
The Air Force has estimated it will spend $2.87 billion in research and develop funds through fiscal 2021 on the project, and the Government Accountability Office projects the total cost will be $3.2 billion.
Boeing lost over $250 million building the current VC-25A aircraft - as noted earlier some of that was due to a poor program management, but much of it was underestimating the work required to meet the USAF requirements (adding things like dual APUs, aerial refueling, and EMP hardening to a passenger aircraft doesn't come cheap
)As noted, I know more than I can say about the new aircraft requirements but if the USAF gets everything they are asking for, little more than the airframe structure will be common with a 747-8i. As I noted before, I was stunned at the level of system redesign that will be needed to meet the AF1 requirements - and that was just for the engines...
It's not your average commute, and when you buy in small production runs the cost per unit is steep.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Nutty, correct, I wonder what our cousins' take on him is.
Buster, could be a CoG problem with the beast in the tail. I like the lift though, avoids the potential for trips and saves your knees running up the stairs. It would however mean the end of the iconic pose at the door of AF 1. I guess the Secret Service would vote for that as that top if steps wave must be the most vulnerable moment in any trip.
Buster, could be a CoG problem with the beast in the tail. I like the lift though, avoids the potential for trips and saves your knees running up the stairs. It would however mean the end of the iconic pose at the door of AF 1. I guess the Secret Service would vote for that as that top if steps wave must be the most vulnerable moment in any trip.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"top if steps wave must be the most vulnerable moment in any trip."
Almost always at a totally controlled airfield, normally military - if he's not safe there where is he safe? Compared to being out in crowds -even if they mainly his supporters??
Almost always at a totally controlled airfield, normally military - if he's not safe there where is he safe? Compared to being out in crowds -even if they mainly his supporters??
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Td,
Fascinating insight...which leads one to wonder if there are fundamental differences in the AAR system developed for the E-4 and that for the VC-25, both are adaptions of the basic 747-200 airframe and were to be refuelled from the same tankers.
Similarly the adaptation of the airframe and systems for EMP reasons would have been required for the E-4 mission and the VC-25 mission would have perhaps built on that as opposed to a completely 'new' system etc.
One could also imagine that the power generation and distribution requirements of the comms gear on the E-4 would have provided a basic, proven, deployed and accepted design from which the VC-25 could have evolved.
Or have I missed the point entirely and the E-4 lessons were in reality inappropriate for the VC-25 programme?
Fascinating insight...which leads one to wonder if there are fundamental differences in the AAR system developed for the E-4 and that for the VC-25, both are adaptions of the basic 747-200 airframe and were to be refuelled from the same tankers.
Similarly the adaptation of the airframe and systems for EMP reasons would have been required for the E-4 mission and the VC-25 mission would have perhaps built on that as opposed to a completely 'new' system etc.
One could also imagine that the power generation and distribution requirements of the comms gear on the E-4 would have provided a basic, proven, deployed and accepted design from which the VC-25 could have evolved.
Or have I missed the point entirely and the E-4 lessons were in reality inappropriate for the VC-25 programme?
Ummm....isn't the E-4 a 747-200 design of roughly the same era as the VC-25, and also currently being considered for replacement on obsolescence grounds? So what commonality would it have with a 747-800-based solution anyway?
PDR
PDR
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PDR precisely....... E-4A contract was 1973 with a service entry in 1974...Vc-25 RFP mid 1980s and entered service in 1990... so by the time the VC was being procured the E-4 had a decade plus in service.
So AAR system might have been a straight copy across.. so may have a number of EMP/ power generation/ comms aspects..
It would be interesting to understand how Boeing, having produced seven E-4 airframes were caught 'short' of some of the issues needed to develop the VC-25...especially one of the specific adaptions which may well have been evolutions of the E-4 designs.
If however as you mention the replacement E-4 is also being studied as part of the VC programme then the increased R+D may well be appropriate for the more complex and challenging task...
So AAR system might have been a straight copy across.. so may have a number of EMP/ power generation/ comms aspects..
It would be interesting to understand how Boeing, having produced seven E-4 airframes were caught 'short' of some of the issues needed to develop the VC-25...especially one of the specific adaptions which may well have been evolutions of the E-4 designs.
If however as you mention the replacement E-4 is also being studied as part of the VC programme then the increased R+D may well be appropriate for the more complex and challenging task...
PDR, I've had the same thought that perhaps some of what was being asked for was really applicable to an E-4 replacement more than the AF1 mission.
I wasn't involved in the original E-4 so I don't know how much carry-over there might have been between that and the current VC-25 - I do know the VC-25 has different engines (CF6-80C2 vs. CF6-50s for the E-4) so in my area it was totally different. There was a great deal of 'wheel inventing' going on during the VC-25, but I don't know how much of that might have been 're-inventing'
BTW, there already is an 'elevator' option available for the 747-8i - it's fitted to at least one of the VIP aircraft (although it's done via STC during the executive interior refit - Boeing doesn't do it).
I wasn't involved in the original E-4 so I don't know how much carry-over there might have been between that and the current VC-25 - I do know the VC-25 has different engines (CF6-80C2 vs. CF6-50s for the E-4) so in my area it was totally different. There was a great deal of 'wheel inventing' going on during the VC-25, but I don't know how much of that might have been 're-inventing'
BTW, there already is an 'elevator' option available for the 747-8i - it's fitted to at least one of the VIP aircraft (although it's done via STC during the executive interior refit - Boeing doesn't do it).
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Perhaps Boeing should call Trump's bluff.
They could say they will supply two standard B-747-8i at the normal price and whatever else you want to install is down to you at your own expense!
They could say they will supply two standard B-747-8i at the normal price and whatever else you want to install is down to you at your own expense!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
HH, I am sure that the SS cover approaching 100% risk but remember a sniper could be over a mile away and there have been terrorist attacks by members of the military.
Then of course the simple Humpty Dumpty syndrome
Then of course the simple Humpty Dumpty syndrome
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well I know someone who fell between the steps of the plane and the aircraft door - she was sober but too busy taking in the view - several nasty (but superficial) grazes and cuts)
And a guy leaving the plane, missing a step, and going all the way to the bottom - two cracked ribs and a broken leg
Unlikely to happen to POTUS but with Trump in place................
And a guy leaving the plane, missing a step, and going all the way to the bottom - two cracked ribs and a broken leg
Unlikely to happen to POTUS but with Trump in place................
PDR precisely....... E-4A contract was 1973 with a service entry in 1974...Vc-25 RFP mid 1980s and entered service in 1990... so by the time the VC was being procured the E-4 had a decade plus in service.
So AAR system might have been a straight copy across.. so may have a number of EMP/ power generation/ comms aspects..
So AAR system might have been a straight copy across.. so may have a number of EMP/ power generation/ comms aspects..
If I was asked for a big-handfulls guestimate for a VC-25 replacement something like $2-3bn would feel reasonable, frankly.
PDR
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,047
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
You don't need all that secure stuff, just borrow Hilary's laptop and do it all on that.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PDR-1 is correct - the (very expensive) troubles Boeing had in getting the new 747 right clealry show it wasn't a simple upgrade from the older models.....................
On occasions when the President and other US top leaders are gathered at a single location (eg State of The Union Address or Presidential Inauguration), there is at least one Designated Survivor at a remote location with presidential level security and a "nuclear football" military aide.
It is hard to understand what that $4B number means in his thought process. Flight Global reports that the DoD has contracted for $127M for specification research and Boeing says the contract is $170M for "unique capabilities" definitions. It sounds like those two numbers are for the same research.
The DoD says the current estimate $1.65B is for TWO new Air Force One planes.
How Trump got to $4B is puzzling.
The DoD says the current estimate $1.65B is for TWO new Air Force One planes.
How Trump got to $4B is puzzling.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want us to buy this guy a new airplane either. Put the two old VC25s we have in a museum and let him walk. Or maybe he can Tweet his way around the world.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a swag- but although BA will be the ' general' contractor- maybe 20 percent of the total will go directly to Boeing for the ' green airframe ' with special wiring, armour, etc. the rest of the $$$ will go to interior, comm gear, anti missile, extra apu,engines, flight test by air force, spares, etc ad naseaum.
even so , what is still puzzling is how long it takes to ' decide ' what changes to airframe are needed, and to provide wiring, hooks, brackets, stiffners, extra pieces, emp shielding, etc. EMP shielding has been around since the 60's at least- and now the use of cad-cam should make the fitting of extra brackets, etc relatively easy.
even so , what is still puzzling is how long it takes to ' decide ' what changes to airframe are needed, and to provide wiring, hooks, brackets, stiffners, extra pieces, emp shielding, etc. EMP shielding has been around since the 60's at least- and now the use of cad-cam should make the fitting of extra brackets, etc relatively easy.