Not quite - AF1 is only for USAF aircraft.

When POTUS is aboard one of the VH-3Ds or VH-60Ns, he is aboard "Marine One" - and when Bush43 was aboard that USN S-3B Viking on 1 May 2003 flying to CVN-72 to give the "Mission Accomplished" speech, he was aboard "Navy One"!

If he was in a US Army Chinook it would be "Army One".

the argument over "cutting edge" is odd- you can only fit what gear is available and keep upgrading it - of course you can argue that a newer design would be more efficient and cost less over the life of service

My comment about "quaint" was nothing to do with efficient but with appearances - like it or not AF1 is part of the Presidential "image" and in 30-50 years time those 747's are going to look very old

Rather as if the presidential limo was still a 1950's Cadillac Eldorado - beautiful - yes, stil running yes - but up to date image noooooooooooooooo

The 747 still looks unique though, and is likely to continue to do so for decades. It is, quite simply, an iconic design. It has been around for ages and in no way looks dated.

Remember that the 747 first enterd use as Air Force One in 1990, some 20-odd years after it entered passenger service. Anything 'cutting edge' will likely have to see several years of trouble-free operation until adopted as AF1. The Boeing 707 served as an AF1 from '62 to '01, hardly cutting edge, or indeed uniquely styled - though perhaps iconic, for its latter years. I don't look at a 787 or A380 and think cutting edge either - both look entirely conventional in fact. Sure, the A380 is big and the 787 has bendy wings, but neither makes them cutting edge visually - and I don't think the general public of any nation will give two hoots about advanced internal design or anything else.

There are more advanced aerodynamic proposals in (general) development - I'm not referring to enlarged/reduced blueprints of tubes with wings here. Anything 'cutting edge' will likely have to see several years of trouble-free operation until adopted as AF1. And it isn't really that aerodynamics have advanced, it's that material technology has, thus making them viable to build.

Boeing's 'Yellowstone' is divided in to three projects. Y3 is supposed to lead to a 747 and 777-300 replacement. Might see one of these as AF1 sometime (these are all NASA concepts, I think) probably over 50 years away though. I dare say tdracer has access to a great deal more information.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/...udix3fjpng.png

http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/image...lane_large.jpg

http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/image...lane_large.jpg

http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/fi...?itok=5KTVzsow

http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/fi...?itok=J1sBqKrO

http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/fi...?itok=3SGM8oX1

I really like the look of pic #3 Willard but how the hell you get the passengers on and off at LHR or JFK is another question...................

maybe a hatch in the top or bottom of the blended body you can insert a couple of escalators in..................

Perhaps it could be like Thunderbird 2 and carry the passengers in a separate pod.

http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs70/f/20...dc-d1moxql.jpg

http://th05.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/...rarian_bot.jpg

Still cutting edge after all these years!

KenV will probably be along shortly to explain that he worked on a proposal for this and why it's not suitable :}

S-D

Don't understand what all the fuss is about, David Cameron has a new 4-engine luxurious business jet?

http://globalaviationresource.com/v2...ps29f589b5.jpg

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-con...af-in-mali.jpg