Air Force One to be outsourced?

[Popeman38]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/01/search-begins-f.html


After a couple years of speculation, yesterday the air branch officially announced its search for a new high-tech jumbo jet to haul around the President and his peeps. And like the bitter, now-canceled tanker contest, AF1 2.0 will pit a Boeing product (a new 747) against a plane from a European firm (the Airbus A380).

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

Why in the hell would we outsource the production of the Presidents plane? To France?!?!?!?

If we were producing the French presidential fleet, you know we would build a "back door" into the communications system. Do we think they would not do the same?

[BigMike619]

My father helped build the hangar that it stays in. Secret Service used to follow him and sit up the street from our house.

[BALLz]

My father helped build the hangar that it stays in. Secret Service used to follow him and sit up the street from our house.


Really, was that more to keep tabs on him or to protect him?

[Stophovr6]

Not to nit pick but that blog, quotes a blog that quotes the text below. Nothing in there says, "should we look at the airbus or the boeing?" The blog you quoted probably came to that conclusion, because the blog it quoted said "Let the 747-8I versus A380 debate commence!"

Of course that doesn't mean we wouldn't consider this debate. Just that at this point, we aren't inline to buy a 380 for the Pres.


The United States Air Force is conducting market research to identify potential sources that possess the expertise, capabilities, and experience to meet the requirements of the next generation Presidential fixed-wing aircraft. The current VC-25 Air Force One, based on the 747-200 airframe, was purchased in 1987 and delivered in 1990 with a 30 year design life. As 747-200s have been retired from airline service, parts and maintenance are becoming increasingly expensive. The Air Force conducted an Analysis of Alternatives to examine if it would be more cost effective to maintain the current Air Force One, or to buy a new aircraft. Given the diminishing parts supplier base, increasing maintenance time, and system upgrades that would be necessary to meet future air traffic control requirements, it was found that replacing the VC-25 was the most cost effective option.
The PAR aircraft will be a new-build, commercial derivative, wide-body aircraft, uniquely modified to meet the current and projected requirements for the worldwide transportation of the Office of the President. Modifications regarding passenger communications, information systems, interior work & rest environment, and aerial refueling must be accomplished before delivery of the aircraft. The delivery of the first operationally capable aircraft is required in FY17, with delivery of the second and third aircraft in FY19 and FY21, respectively. The PAR aircraft must maintain the highest possible mission capable rate.

The PAR aircraft will provide the President of the United States, staff, and guests with safe and reliable air transportation with the appropriate level of security and communications capability. Mission communications must provide secure, interoperable command, control, and communications, using net-centric architectures.
The interior must provide a work and rest environment suitable for the President, guests, and traveling staff. The interior configuration must provide the President with ample work and conference areas (including sleeping, lavatory, shower, and dressing areas). The interior must be accessible to the physically impaired. The interior must be configured with galleys that provide the aircrew with the capability to prepare, serve, and store food and beverages. It must also provide for housekeeping and waste disposal.

The modified aircraft will be Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certified, and will meet projected aviation requirements to conduct worldwide flight operations in all civil and military airspace as defined by the FAA, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and Department of Defense (DOD).

[BigMike619]

Really, was that more to keep tabs on him or to protect him?

it was to keep tabs on him. it started about a month before the job started and went all the way thru it.

they must have been bored because all my dad ever did was work from like 4AM until 6PM and then come home and crash out.

[twa]

Isn't a lot of the the new Marine One copters built in Europe?

[Raub]

Isn't a lot of the the new Marine One copters built in Europe?

The VH-71?That's not a done deal. The program has had severe budget overruns and technical issues. Supposedly the budget overruns are so severe that each airframe would cost more to build than an Air Force One. The aircraft is also currently underpowered to meet the requirements that were issued. It can't meet the range requirements for the required gross weight.

[twa]

Supposed to get five(VH-71s) this year,while they upgrade


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/01/10/320905/first-vh-71-presidential-helicopter-enters-final-production.html

nice new hangers too,but pretty sure that is American made

[Raub]

but pretty sure that is American made

Not really. The fuselage is made in the UK, the rotor system is made in Italy. They ship all the parts to Lockheed for assembly and installation of avionics and other stuff. The first couple of aircraft weren't even assembled by Lockheed. They were built in the UK and flown over on C-17s. I'll be real surprised if these things are operational before about 2015, and it really wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing gets cut.

[Stophovr6]

I spoke to my Boeing engineer roomate. He basically said there is little chance that we take an A380, because at this point, there are a lot of runways in the world that don't have enough room for it. The 747 obviously can land at those airports, so it would be the better bet.

Of course they don't need the plane until 2017, so maybe there will be more elongated runways at that point.

Food for thought.

He also said to add the 787 as an option. It's a wide body and would probably be more cost effective.

[Midnight Judges]

purely from a procurement standpoint, competition is a good thing.

[twa]

Not really.


I was being a smartass and referring to the new hangers:)

They are having numerous problems with the shift in specs((VH-71s), but my son says the interim ones are bound to be a nice upgrade over what they have.

Not sure I'd trust the newly designed engines and tailsections though,sounds like a recipe for failure

[mjah]

If we were producing the French presidential fleet, you know we would build a "back door" into the communications system. Do we think they would not do the same?

I don't think you'd have to worry about back doors, when all of the as-delivered comm equipment would just get gutted all the way down to the sticks & skin and replaced by a US aerospace/military contractor's special issue comm equipment anyway.

And the assembly of Air Force one will be watched like a hawk 24/7 by a team of specially trained security personnel, no matter where it happens.

In addition, it's probably safe to say that no matter where it's built, the new Air Force One will get its own special and VERY thorough interior tear-down and rebuild after it's delivered -- before it sees even a single day of official service.

[Raub]

I was being a smartass and referring to the new hangers:)


Sorry, my sarcasm meter wasn't functioning properly ;)

Is your son at Quantico?

[jrfriedm]

I personally think that is wrong that the US government purchase equipment from other nations. :2cents:

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I personally think that is wrong that the US government purchase equipment from other nations. :2cents:

So we should overspend on inferior products made by American companies?

[Stophovr6]

I personally think that is wrong that the US government purchase equipment from other nations. :2cents:

Do you think it's wrong for other governments to purchase our equipment, such as an airplane? Or is it just wrong for us to buy foreign equipment because we have comparable equipment?

No one has yet to even prove we are looking at an Airbus as a replacement. But here we go already with the protectionism and blaming the French.

It's time to embrace the New World Order my friend.:silly:

[jrfriedm]

Do you think it's wrong for other governments to purchase our equipment, such as an airplane? Or is it just wrong for us to buy a foreign equipment because we have comparable equipment?

No one has yet to even prove we are looking at and Airbus as a replacement. But here we go already with the protectionism and blaming the French.

It's time to embrace the New World Order my friend.:silly:

First of all I'm not blaming the French, I'm blaming the US Government if they do purchase a French airplane over one made here in the US.

I really don't care what other countries do, I'm not a citizen of them, however; I am of the believe that unless you are purchasing an item that CAN NOT be made he in the USA, the US Government should have to purchase US products. :2cents:

**** the French :thumbsup:

[DarrellsMyHero28]

First of all I'm not blaming the French, I'm blaming the US Government if they do purchase a French airplane over one made here in the US.

I really don't care what other countries do, I'm not a citizen of them, however; I am of the believe that unless you are purchasing an item that CAN NOT be made he in the USA, the US Government should have to purchase US products. :2cents:

**** the French :thumbsup:

So I take it your answer to my previous question is yes we should overpay for inferior products made in America.

[jrfriedm]

So I take it your answer to my previous question is yes we should overpay for inferior products made in America.

I'm deffenitly no expert on the subject, but I can tell you with a certain amount of confidence that Boeing makes a very good Airplane and I think that their should be fair price contracted for an american product. Afterall, it would be a way of giving Americans money back to Americans, while also ensuring that Americans have jobs.

[Stophovr6]

I'm deffenitly no expert on the subject, but I can tell you with a certain amount of confidence that Boeing makes a very good Airplane and I think that their should be fair price contracted for an american product. Afterall, it would be a way of giving Americans money back to Americans, while also ensuring that Americans have jobs.

Boeing is a good company. I looked into this subject having a friend that is a Boeing engineer, I don't think this debate is going to be between the 747 and A380. It will more likely be a debate comparing the 747, 777 and 787. :2cents:

There's a little more info in my previous posts.

[jrfriedm]

Boeing is a good company. I looked into this subject having a friend that is a Boeing engineer, I don't think this debate is going to be between the 747 and A380. It will more likely be a debate comparing the 747, 777 and 787. :2cents:

There's a little more info in my previous posts.

My point is just that I think that the government should, support it own country and economy and buy American.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I'm deffenitly no expert on the subject, but I can tell you with a certain amount of confidence that Boeing makes a very good Airplane and I think that their should be fair price contracted for an american product. Afterall, it would be a way of giving Americans money back to Americans, while also ensuring that Americans have jobs.


Boeing is a good company. I looked into this subject having a friend that is a Boeing engineer, I don't think this debate is going to be between the 747 and A380. It will more likely be a debate comparing the 747, 777 and 787. :2cents:

There's a little more info in my previous posts.


My point is just that I think that the government should, support it own country and economy and buy American.

With the recent Boeing scandal, and the general trend of overseas companies having products that are often cheaper and better I don't have an issue with this.

My question to you jrfiedm is this:

If the US Government has the choice between product A which is made in America or product B which is a cheaper and better product but is made overseas--which do they buy?

The rest of the world is catching up. American workers demand more money for less work than workers in other countries. Our workers are incredibly overpaid considering their output. Can you blame a company...or the government for trying to buy the best product at a lower price?

Globalization is a reality, and until US companies start churning out equal or better products at equal or better compared to foreign companies, the US Government should go for the best deal.

[twa]

Sorry, my sarcasm meter wasn't functioning properly ;)

Is your son at Quantico?

Yeah,usually except trips(HMX1 security dick)
Right now I think he's in Missouri finishing up more SWAT training.