Slashdot Mirror
US Air Force Selects Boeing 747-8 To Replace Air Force One
Tyketto writes Following up on a previous story about its replacement, the US Air Force has selected the Boeing 747-8 to replace the aging Presidential fleet of two VC-25s, which are converted B747-200s. With the only other suitable aircraft being the Airbus A380, the USAF cited Boeing's 50-year history of building presidential aircraft as their reason to skip competition and opt directly for the aircraft, which due to dwindling sales and prospects, may be the last 747s to be produced.
The entire point in using a massively successful commercial platform for this kind of thing is that spare parts will continue to be in production for decades to support the huge customer base. Even if the -8 has a limited run compared to other 747s, it's not like they've dropped support for the SP even though it too was only built in limited numbers.
As for why the 747 could be discontinued, at least for awhile; there's an upper limit on the number of superjumbos needed on the planet, and I expect that we're probably not far from that point. So long as the current fleet continues to operate safely then there's simply no need to produce more planes. As the current fleet wears though, eventually new replacements will be needed for those routes where moving this many passengers makes sense, especially if the manufacturers can get the efficiency up. That's part of what's eating into the superjumbos; the ability for multiple flights a day with smaller planes to get equal fuel economy per passenger and at the same time offer more flexibility (ie more than one flight per day) due to the use of smaller planes.
My wife used to fly fifteen times a year. There was one city that she flew to the most, and she chose the airline with the most daily flights because airlines will often move one up to an earlier flight or two that same day if there's empty space, because they can sell the seats on the later flights to last-minute purchasers. She could come home four or eight hours early if she was done early and didn't need to be there anymore. An airline flying two or three 777s or A320s per day offers her more flexibility than one flying one 747 or one A380, and that's worth something.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
There will be hundreds of 747s flying for the next three to four decades, so parts are not an issue - Boeing makes the majority of its money on aftermarket care and parts, they won't close those lines down fast.
So...$1.65 billion to buy the planes from Boeing, and how many millions per year to have Boeing keep a tooling line up for spare parts?
Since airlines were still ordering new 747-8s (the platform on which the new Air Force One(s) would be built) in 2014 - and might still continue to do so - this isn't exactly an obsolete aircraft. I mean, the first 747-8s weren't delivered to customers until 2011. There are still-flying 747-variant fuselages in commercial (passenger and freight) service that have been in the air since the late 1970s and early 1980s. Based on that history, it seems likely that Boeing will need to support its commercial customers through to at least 2045 or so.
~Idarubicin
true, but with a 4 engine plane, if 1 fails, you are still good, if 2 fail, chances are you are still good. Ive even heard of 3 engines going down and a plane landing safely with 1 of 3 engines.
your head of state needs safety and redundancy, not fuel economy
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
A British Airways jumbo jet lost power in an engine on takeoff from Los Angeles International Airport last month, but the pilot elected not to make an emergency landing for repairs, deciding instead to continue the 5,400-mile, transatlantic flight to London on the remaining three engines, officials said Monday.
Because of unfavorable winds and inefficiencies resulting from the engine loss, the Boeing 747-400 burned more fuel than anticipated, and the pilot was forced to cut the nonstop flight short and land in Manchester, England, the airline said.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Fully aware of the KC-X contest, NG was the prime contractor but it was actually Airbus that did all the work.
The KC-X contest was only ran because Boeing got caught firstly trying to lease replacement tankers to the USAF at a rate which was several times more than they cost to buy, and then Boeing got caught in the first round buying the Airbus bid details from the US DOD procurement officer in charge of the bids.
Even with a US prime contractor and a US assembly line, there was massive uproar over the fact that Airbus had won the second round of bidding, before it got out back out to tender and Boeing magically found a way to make the 767 offering several billion dollars less than their previous bid...
There is no way the US political arena would accept a non-American plane as AF1. Which raises an interesting problem when the next replacement comes round...
Based on Wikipedia, the freighter variant of the 747-8 is unexpectedly popular. The 747 already dominates the civilian air freighter market so it's a good bet the 747-8 will be around for a very long time, if only due to the numerous freighter versions being operated around the world.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
the Bentley Jubilee 2002 was built and furnished entirely in England. The engine is a Rolls Royce TT 6.75l V8 purpose-built in Derby. Coachwork and chassis assembled by hand in Crewe, and the furniture by Hield in West Yorkshire. It might be *owned* by Volkswagen but the manufacturing is entirely still British labour.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel