US Air Force One Replacement - President-Elect Trump's View
 

Tweet: "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...34244384899072

He's not the president yet, we'll see how this pans out. Interesting point.

I believe they are actually building three......

The 1st time I ever agreed with him
 

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.

@Globalnav:

When he's the President, he gets to be treated like the President whether you like him or not. This is the same as when Mr Obama was president: it is the office, not the individual, that this special aircraft is intended to serve/transport/support.

Thanks for the civics lesson.

Mr (President-Elect) Trump used that most respected form of communication known to our modern world (Twitter) to inform us of another a knee-jerk reaction, this time concerning the Air Force One program. So I dutifully salute the office (elect) and say let him cancel it and let the man walk. Why waste a few billion tax dollars on him unnecessarily?

Maybe he would prefer that the Chinese build a cheaper knock-off copy instead?

I wouldn't mind if he had one of those persuasive chats with the big B about sending all those jobs to Shanghai.

Because the next president(s) after him will need it to. Getting replacement AF-1's takes that mission's capability into the next few decades.
I concur with your distaste regarding Twitter.
I concur with the issue of the jobs. Will be interesting to see if his walk matches his talk.

To be serious for a moment, the office does need a safe and secure mode of transportation such as the VC-25 has provided and obsolescence is intolerable.

That the president-elect seems to regularly shoot from the hip ("ready-shoot-aim") is likely to result in some missing toes (i.e., costly interruptions).

In the meantime, there are long-legged Gulfstreams, also dedicated to presidential travel. But the staff and press will need to follow in another aircraft. He could still Tweet and stay in touch.

Trump wants to cancel Air Force One order
 

Nowt to lose. He gets to use it until his term finishes, leaving his successor with nothing.

Normal procedure is the outgoing Prez orders it to avoid embarrassing the new comer I suppose. If true this may mean the closure of the 748 line.

Perhaps if the great man took the time to understand that the mission was more involved than moving his latest squeeze between fashion shows, he might begin to understand how it costs as much as it does. I know through life costs, amortization, obsolescence, EMP hardening etc are very, very tedious subjects for such a great, great man, but he might want to ask somebody on Fox news or even twitter, whether these things are important or not for the subsequent Commanders-in-Chief over the next 30 years.

Interesting article here analyzing his 'chaos theory' Donald Trump presidency: Boeing and his chaos theory - BBC News - it is amazing how 140 characters can send a major corporations stock price falling 1%

What
 

Omg why? he's so retarded

Amazing? Or is it the age old phenomena that it's easier to tear something down than to build it up. Or the other one, it's easier to say you will do something than to actually do it.

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.

TI, were you quick to criticize President Obama when he complained about the costs associated with the new Marine 1 helicopter?

Indeed I don't say any (publicly available) material quoting those 4bn...

It might or might not be an expansive price tag... All depends what is delivered against it.

NPR saying Trump sold his Boeing stock last June.
.

To be fair, he was already in office and that particular program had caught a dose of "requirements creep" -- but I digress. IMO, it was a calculated move to demonstrate that the President was "getting tough with that horrible acquisition system" while at the same time making a self sacrifice by not getting a new bird ... just a thought.

The parallel is there, the difference is/was timing.

Absolutely, because he could have had a Westland/LM version 5 years earlier for half the cost. Although to be fair to you, I am still struggling with maintaining any objectivity when commenting about the man, but there's hope for me yet.

In some respects I think the USA have to get over the importance of one person.

Firstly, there is no one waiting for a momentary window to deliver a nuclear strike on the USA.

Secondly, according to the constitution, there is always a replacement.

Every other nuclear power seems to be able to manage to allow their heads of state to fly around without such a logistics tail.

To be perfectly honest, he is talking total sense, and being disparaged for doing so....

Is it the cost he doesn't like then? Or the timescale creep? I mean it does seem an excessive cost. Is he not elected on a ticket to cut US Govt. waste>?
Sticking my neck out but why couldn't he use a appropriately painted C17 nicely fitted out in-side (painted faux gold even in his private bit)?
Also what does Putin use, or the Chinese leader?
I mean Trump did say he was going to be different....

Hangarshuffle, it is wise to remember that American presidents serve temporarily, not for life. Comparing them to the Russian or Chinese head of state is not apples to apples.

T28 is that true? Putin wont be in forever. Surely it is apples for apples?
They're heads of state and need a set of wings to get about? That's it?
Trump thinks the cost is excessive and things POTUS should be setting an example, is that his point?
Also, isn't a 747 a bit er.. out dated now anyway? Why that particular aircraft?

IMO

It's US made, a requirement whether written or not. I stand to be corrected, but I believe I read the secret service balked at a two holer for lack of redundancy and electrical power capability. The C-17 line is shut down and may not be large and swanky enough. It sells aircraft to be seen flying the President. Shoot, the Chinese use a 747 for their executive transport.

I was directly involved in the current AF1 aircraft - and I know that Boeing lost hundreds of millions on those two 747s due to the fixed price nature of the contracts combined with less than elegant program management.
Shortly before I retired from Boeing last October, I was given a briefing on the upcoming replacement and how it was going to affect the engine package.
While nearly everything is proprietary/confidential (meaning I can't talk about it), I was quite frankly shocked at the level of 'gold plating' that was going into the requirements with little - if any - regard to the associated costs. Right now, it's looking very much like another 'cost is no object' program. $4 Billion doesn't sound out of line for what's being asked.
If nothing else, I think the USAF needs to go back and scrub the requirements with an eye on cost vs. benefit.

What are Mr Putin's term limits? Suggest you look at his entire history at the top of government, to include the Medvedev interregnum. We know what the American ones are. The comparison is not apples to apples.
Jimmy Carter once declared that he'd close Camp David, as it was an excess or a luxury. Once he got into office, the light went on and Camp David remains open to this day. Perhaps once in the job Donald Trump will likewise see things differently.
Your point on the 747 being outdated: perhaps, but the other face of the same coin is that it is mature technology and has 4 donks. There are some stringent rules on how reliable, how mature, and how well proven a particular plane can be to be eligible for Presidential service. Others probably know the details, and will hopefully elaborate.

For HS:
I will offer that Air Force 1 is not just transport. It is also an airborne C2 node. That particular feature of the big aircraft informed the previously mentioned requirements creep on the Merlin variant (that was cancelled, as noted above) in terms of how much more C2 equipment they tried to pile onto that aircraft.

Trump's Tantrum
 

Being reported that his tweet was after the Boeing CEO was quoted on how important free trade is to Boeing. This made Trump look stupid and he retaliated. A petty little man.

The Sultan

The requirement was for a 4 engine large jet leaving a choice of just two and it was never going to be A380.... The 747-8I is, I would imagine, a pretty modern jet.

Re obsession with one person, doesn't the VP have his own (smaller) kite as well?

All aircraft purchases - especially military end up costing more than any 'deal price'. But the quoted price does seem a tad steep - usual 'let's rip a Government off' scenario.

Any unwanted new A380's going cheap I wonder? ;-)

"Firstly, there is no one waiting for a momentary window to deliver a nuclear strike on the USA.

Secondly, according to the constitution, there is always a replacement."

You are totally correct ORAC - the only problem is that the (long) list of succesors are almost always sitting together in D.C

I think there was a suggestion to add someone like the State Governors to the end of the list just in case

No sacrifice to him - they weren't due to enter service until 2024, apparently.

I'm just bemused that some people seem to think a C-17 based solution would cheaper than a 747-based one. Never mind the detail that a C-17 would need a waiver for the ditching-at-sea case.

PDR

He's sending messages - $ 2Bn for a couple of aircraft looks obscene to his supporters plus he's putting the frighteners on Mr B etc and basically saying the great days are over - if you come in with big estimates expect to be dragged through the media

I'm sure the USAF will still get the aircarft but times are a changin' for sure

There are number of inaccuracies in Trump's Tweet.
“Boeing is building . . . ”

Earlier in 2016, Boeing received a $170 million contract to design a replacement for the aging pair of Air Force Ones used by the president. Boeing is not actually building the jet, though logically it is the only U.S. manufacturer with the capability to build such an aircraft.

“ … a brand new 747 Air Force One … ”

At a minimum, there would be two Air Force Ones. You need a spare in case there is a problem with one. The jets generally have a life cycle of 30 years.

A plane only receives the call sign “Air Force One” when the president is on board. This is actually a highly modified version of the Boeing 747-8 jet.

“Costs are out of control, more than $4 billion”

Cost have actually not been set. The Defense Department’s five-year plan indicates a cost of $2.9 billion over the next five years for design and development. It’s logical to assume at least another $1 billion in additional expenses to complete and procure the aircraft.

So an estimate of $4 billion — for design, testing and manufacture of at least two jets — is not completely out of line. But the budget is subject to approval by Congress and the actual design of the aircraft. Boeing literally needs to re-engineer the plane from the ground up, so there are many one-time expenses.

Air Force One needs to be designed to survive a nuclear war. It requires all sorts of undisclosed security upgrades and countermeasures. It can refuel in flight. The actual cost of the plane will depend on the equipment that goes into it. There also needs to be extensive testing, probably lasting two years, before the plane is deemed ready for presidential travel.

Congress obviously would have a say in the final price tag.

Boeing says it made no money making the last set of Air Force One jets and does not expect to make money on this order, as it is more a matter of prestige.

“Cancel the order!”

Nothing has been ordered yet. But the program could be eliminated. This may not be a problem for Trump, but certainly would affect his successors. The current aircraft were delivered in 1990, and as noted, the life cycle is about 30 years. The Pentagon says the current fleet “faces capability gaps, rising maintenance costs, and parts obsolescence as it reaches the end of its planned 30-year life-cycle.”

Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said “the program is very new and hardly had a chance to get started yet.” So, in effect, there are no real cost overruns yet. He added that the estimated $4 billion cost is reasonable given the requirements of the project.

More of the costs are associated with the sophisticated and highly classified communication and other classified electronic equipment than with the actual aircraft cost.

I sometimes think Trump suffers from ADS based on his Tweets.