USAF looking to replace VC-25s by 2017

Teller1900

Teller1900

En-Route
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,644
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
I am a dad!
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/AFONE011409.xml

Contractors interested in competing for the VC-25A replacement, the to-be Air Force One, are expected to provide preliminary data to the service by Jan. 28. The Air Force issued a request for information last week.
Three aircraft are sought, with deliveries expected in fiscal 2017, 2019 and 2021. The service desires a newly built aircraft derived from existing commercial widebodies.



Today's Air Force One, the VC-25A, was built on Boeing's 747-200 airframe and delivered in 1990 with a 30-year design life. Maintenance of the fleet is growing more costly as commercial 747-200s have been retired from service with the airlines.
Click to expand...

I find it hard to believe the A380 would be a viable contender, given the small number of landing facilities it can utilize. Then again, it would just weird to see anything but a 747 (and the occasional 757 and Gulfstream) in that iconic blue and white paint scheme.
 
The A380 should be automatically ruled out for two reasons.

1) Very limited number of airports it can use
2) Since when is Airbus an American company?

I'm not one of those "Buy American" folks (as evidenced my garage, which has specimens representing England, Japan, and USA), but the president should only have American vehicles as taxpayer purchased modes of transport. If he wants to buy a BMW or Toyota with his money, I don't care, but his car as president should be a Lincoln or Cadillac, and Air Force One should be a Boeing.
 
It would be interesting to see a 777 as a Blue and White. A few years ago, I would have agreed with the "American Only!" for AF1, but in today's world, nothing is a sure thing. I'm willing to bet the AF1 debate would have a similar path and outcome as the venture to purchase a new tanker. Boeing would get the contract, Airbus would whine, contact gets cancelled and re rewarded, then cancelled again because Boeing says "no fair!", thus resulting in years of lawsuits to figure out who gets to take the POTUS to the dance. Just sickning. Without a doubt it should be Boeing, but I just don't know these days.
 
AWACSEng said:
A few years ago, I would have agreed with the "American Only!" for AF1, but in today's world, nothing is a sure thing....Without a doubt it should be Boeing, but I just don't know these days.
Click to expand...

Right, my point is what it should be, not what will actually happen.

I would be pretty surprised if Airbus was awarded the contract, though.
 
Hmmm how about getting him a "Classic". I think it would be neat for the Prez to show up in a restored Super Constellation.
 
The way I look at it, the 747 series has been more than adequate. Why not just use the latest and greatest in the series. This just isn't that hard but the politics of the whole process will make it that hard.
 
A story I heard about the VC-25A competition was that the president of Boeing basically said that POTUS would be flying in a Boeing aircraft - implying the Boeing would make
sure they won the competition for the two aircraft. (note: in the story, there was no implication of inappropriate behavior on the part of Boeing)
 
AWACSEng said:
The way I look at it, the 747 series has been more than adequate. Why not just use the latest and greatest in the series. This just isn't that hard but the politics of the whole process will make it that hard.
Click to expand...

We saw the latest and greatest at AirVenture this year:

p998.jpg


Hopefully it would be sufficient to hold Obama's ego. :D Just kidding. Don't send to SZ.
 
I saw one of those this past summer at PANC. What a odd looking craft. Looked like a 747 with a tumor.
 
p999.jpg


It may be ugly, but it will fit in most airports. It landed on 36 and got stopped by P-2 (what is that - 5,500 ft of the 8,002 runway?) - the taxiway leading into the Aeroshell Square. Awesome job.
 
"Dreamlifter, you are number two behind an Aeronca."
 
This just in: Airbus won't compete for the contract!

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/AF1-012809.xml

Responses to a request for information from the U.S. Air Force are due today. This leaves Boeing as the only provider for an Air Force One platform. Boeing is exploring the 747-8 and 787 as candidates, according to a company official.
Known as Air Force One, the VIP aircraft officially takes on the name only when the current U.S. president is aboard.
The Air Force has been assessing its options for a replacement Air Force One platform since 2007. EADS looked at A380, A350, A340 and A330 options. But due to the tight security that will surround the systems integration tasks of the Air Force One program, EADS would be required to turn over a so-called green aircraft to a U.S. company for modification. While that model is lucrative for the 179-aircraft Air Force refueling tanker program because it was linked to the opening of a final assembly facility in Alabama, the company didn't find value in selling only three aircraft for presidential transport.
Click to expand...
 
Holly Crap! Something may have gone right for a change in DoD contracting. Glad to see POTUS will remain in a Boeing...the way it should be IMHO.
 
Funny thing is, we just bought a bunch of Eurocopters for the Army to fill the LHU or LHU or whatever the frickin braintrust decided to call it. Light Utility Helicopter? The Lakota?
 
flyersfan31 said:
Funny thing is, we just bought a bunch of Eurocopters for the Army to fill the LHU or LHU or whatever the frickin braintrust decided to call it. Light Utility Helicopter? The Lakota?
Click to expand...

UH-72A Lakota. Based on the EC145. Also made by the EADS consortium, I think.
 
It makes sense that EADS wouldn't want to compete here.

This idea that the POTUS should only buy domestic is quite misguided. The bid should be won by whoever can deliver the best product for the lowest price. The government has an obligation not to waste our money. Our global economy leaves no room for 19 century thinking. We're all worse off if we start with these old tricks again, especially with the worst global recession in 60 years on the horizon.

A question - Why do these planes need to be replaced? Didn't we just admonish Citigroup for buying a new jet?
 
Last edited:
The report I heard is the planes currently are wearing out and are high maintenance. Even if purchased in 2012, they wouldnt be in service for several years, in fact, not til after Obama left office.
 
2017 I think is when I heard they want them in service. I had the same question about the replacement. To be fair, they are -200 series aircraft and there are more fuel and maintenance efficient models of the 747, if that is what the DoD decides to buy. Other than that, I don't see why they need to be replaced. Of course they are high maintenance, but how much of that is self induced? What I mean by that is many parts, even fly to fail, are replaced at the first sign of wear to keep the MC rate where it is needed. I think no matter the age of the aircraft, they will always be high maintenance.
 
Give him a B1. That'd fly the flag!!!!
 
silver-eagle said:
The report I heard is the planes currently are wearing out and are high maintenance. Even if purchased in 2012, they wouldnt be in service for several years, in fact, not til after Obama left office.
Click to expand...

AWACSEng said:
2017 I think is when I heard they want them in service. I had the same question about the replacement. To be fair, they are -200 series aircraft and there are more fuel and maintenance efficient models of the 747, if that is what the DoD decides to buy. Other than that, I don't see why they need to be replaced. Of course they are high maintenance, but how much of that is self induced? What I mean by that is many parts, even fly to fail, are replaced at the first sign of wear to keep the MC rate where it is needed. I think no matter the age of the aircraft, they will always be high maintenance.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the mx cost is getting worse each year as the airlines are retiring (have retired?) their 742 fleets, so parts are harder to find. By getting a newer model, parts and upkeep will be much easier and more cost effective. Not to mention they could get rid of at least one of the four flight crew positions.
 
Easy now! No talk of eliminating the sole voice of reason on the flight deck! Really though, just because there is no traditional FE position on the 748 does not mean the USAF will not create one. There would not be a panel, but they may keep the crew member around for observation/ground servicing purposes. The G-III/V's at Andrews have a "made up" FE possition for this exact purpose. Granted, the other airframes at KADW (757,737) do not.
 
AWACSEng said:
Easy now! No talk of eliminating the sole voice of reason on the flight deck! Really though, just because there is no traditional FE position on the 748 does not mean the USAF will not create one. There would not be a panel, but they may keep the crew member around for observation/ground servicing purposes. The G-III/V's at Andrews have a "made up" FE possition for this exact purpose. Granted, the other airframes at KADW (757,737) do not.
Click to expand...

Haha, sorry :D. I wouldn't be surprised if they do keep some sort of onboard mechanic/engineer position...heck, they have a Nav on the current VC-25s. I'm just saying if they wanted to, they could scale back :smile:.
 
I think they will keep the Nav no matter what based on the type of mission. The FE is dependant on how strong the Engineer union is. We had the option of putting an Eng on the C-17 when it came out, but declined. That was truly the beginning of the end for USAF FE's.
 
AWACSEng said:
I think they will keep the Nav no matter what based on the type of mission. The FE is dependant on how strong the Engineer union is. We had the option of putting an Eng on the C-17 when it came out, but declined. That was truly the beginning of the end for USAF FE's.
Click to expand...

Why'd they decline? What all is left with a three person flight deck - KC-135/E-3/E-8/all other 707 variants, C-5, C-130 up to the J...what else?
 
Technology advancements mainly. Newer airframes have computers that do what the FE used to i.e. Systems monitoring and management, fuel calculations, w+b, etc. The airframes left with "traditional" FE's are E-3, E-8, E-4, VC-25, C-130E+H, all Helos, C-5, KC-10, CV-22. That's all I can think of. Still quite a few opportunities, but FE's will brobably be extinct in 20 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top