Looks like the USAF has decided to replace the current AF-1 VC-25 (B-747) with a 747-8...

https://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/air-force-one-boeing-747-8-114689.html

What I don't understand is how the program rings up at $1.7 Billion for 2 jets...$850 million each. Boeing lists the price of a standard 747-8 at just under $358 million. I find it hard to believe that the A/R receptacle and other "mission mods" cost enough to more than double the cost.

Isn't AF1 EMP hardened? I could imagine that would increase the cost. Kind of like how the Beast is a bit more expensive than a regular Cadillac limo.

What I don't understand is how the program rings up at $1.7 Billion for 2 jets...$850 million each. Boeing lists the price of a standard 747-8 at just under $358 million. I find it hard to believe that the A/R receptacle and other "mission mods" cost enough to more than double the cost.

Considering it will contain a mobile command center, fully outfitted surgical center, a secure war room, hardened against EMP, new skin for stealthier profile, missile defense systems, inflation between now and the first flight- oh and $1.14B for researching the NEXT gen AF1.... see that right there is a large chunk of the $1.7B.

edit: Not clear if that $1.14B is included in the $1.7B or if it's a separate request made to Congress.

Edited January 29, 201510 yr by Vertigo

Also the WHMO will be intimately involved. Look at the now-cancelled VH-71 program for evidence of requirements creep even more egregious than the F-35.

Yes, the old more than meets the eye. I bet it will end up costing far more than that.

It's all about the winglets!

Wtf is wrong with the current AF-1?

Ever heard of sequestration? No new jet for you, Mr Pres.

Wtf is wrong with the current AF-1?

Ever heard of sequestration? No new jet for you, Mr Pres.

The old one is a 747-200, it is getting harder to get parts. Boeing is always on -200 operators to switch to -400 or -800 so they don't have to keep up with the engineering costs and part warehousing. Kalitta you know the guys who bring us ice cream in the AOR are always being asked to stop flying their old iron for newer models. I'm feeling kind of old now, I remember getting 62-6000 from Presidential and getting it ready to fly for a trip to Greenville Tx to get the Presidential paint job removed for the standard VIP paint back in 91 when 28000 got to Andrews. Hell I still remember E-3's when they were new.

The old one is a 747-200, it is getting harder to get parts. Boeing is always on -200 operators to switch to -400 or -800 so they don't have to keep up with the engineering costs and part warehousing. Kalitta you know the guys who bring us ice cream in the AOR are always being asked to stop flying their old iron for newer models. I'm feeling kind of old now, I remember getting 62-6000 from Presidential and getting it ready to fly for a trip to Greenville Tx to get the Presidential paint job removed for the standard VIP paint back in 91 when 28000 got to Andrews. Hell I still remember E-3's when they were new.

I don't disagree with you. In the same vein, how does it make any sense to buy the last 747 off the assembly line if one of the problems were currently having is getting parts I can't see that getting better if they aren't making new ones anymore.

It's because we're too stubborn to trade requirements for cost, regardless of all the acquisition reforms and 'bending the cost curve' BS. The one thing we lack in acquisitions is accountability.

The AF-1 "must" have 4 engines for reliability purposes. The only other option is Airbus 380 and the Pres ain't flying around in a French plane. I think it would be much easier to trade a ridiculous and unfounded requirement of 4 engines for a couple parachutes for the Pres and Secret Service if somehow the engines failed, which given historical reliability rates is slim to none. We're too dumb to learn and no one has the authority to make a decision. Hence, we buy the last 2 747s, shrink wrap them until we can mod them, and run into the same problem of no supply chain to support parts. Win for Boeing, loss for AF acquisitions...again. It's a bunch of yes men running the show.

The thing that chaps my ass about or our organization is that our leaders must know this, they're a helluva lot smarter than me. Yet, there is no incentive to stop the train wreck. Shut up and color and you won't get fired. The F-35 is going to end up costing the same amount per tail as the F-22 with less payload, range, and maneuverability, but regardless of every business professional in the world that says you can't make decisions on sunk cost, we continue to plow funds into this program that was supposed to cost 1/5 the cost of an F-22 per tail. Too many stakeholders to quit now. Sorry for the rant, where's my scotch.

Because it would look weak if POTUS rolled up in a 2 engine wide body when Putin, Khamenei/Rouhani, Mukherjee, or plenty of others have 4 engines. Duh.

I also have to laugh when they say it's approaching the end of it's 30 year life span when the airplane I fly is double that.

But, I am just pleased it went to Boeing without a long drawn out bitchfest between them and Airbus.

That checks. Why aren't we looking at a 777/787?

It's has something to do with the technology available, the VC-25 has 4 huge generators that can handle the load of what is being powered on the jet, IE the E-3 has 8 generators to power the radar and goes tits up when you go down to 6 . Now if you can figure it out on to load up the 2 generators on a twin without melting the wiring you will become a rich man. The next AF-1 after this 747-8 will be a interesting question. Also with the air refueling requirement and nobody else having a 747-8 in the USAF how will they do their currency, actually go up in a P sortie and hit a tanker. Presently the PPO pilots use the E-4B to keep up their currency on ARing.

Edited January 29, 201510 yr by Prosuper

Where will the current tails end up? Will they convert them to E-4s or put them in museums? I had a great time touring the AF1 at the Boeing museum. Would be a big draw wherever it ends up. Wright-Patt and ...?

Also with the air refueling requirement and nobody else having a 747-8 in the USAF how will they do their currency, actually go up in a P sortie and hit a tanker. Presently the PPO pilots use the E-4B to keep up their currency on ARing.

Unless they totally re-design the AR system (i.e., relocate the receptacle), I don't imagine that would be much of an issue (continuing to use the E-4 for currency).

Disclaimer: extensive AR time, zero 747 time

Obviously the President needs a new plane in order to continue to supervise the execution of our flawless foreign policies...

Came across this article and it explains everybody's questions.

https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/02/buying-new-air-force-one-complicated/104220/

There has to be a big markup because the stock 747 does not come with the escape pod standard.

Edited February 15, 201510 yr by ClearedHot

There has to be a big markup because the stock 747 does not come with the escape pod standard.

And that is the old escape pod. The new one as a flat screen TV and Bluetooth.

Also made of unobtanium and carbon fiber but full capability won't be available for 10 years.

But they will install the aluminum one without taking into account the future requirements. This will require a retrofit that will cost triple the airframe cost. However, this isn't a bad thing because it creates expensive problems which in turn requires expensive labor to solve. It is how job creation works.

But they will install the aluminum one without taking into account the future requirements. This will require a retrofit that will cost triple the airframe cost. However, this isn't a bad thing because it creates expensive problems which in turn requires expensive labor to solve. It is how job creation works.

Image of said retrofit:

Edited February 15, 201510 yr by McDonut

Hey there is an original available and apparently it only cost 1 million to restore... Dwight D Eisenhower's Columbine is apparently wasting away in Marana AZ.

https://insider.foxnews.com/2015/02/16/original-air-force-one-wasting-away-arizona-desert

Obviously the President needs a new plane in order to continue to supervise the execution of our flawless foreign policies...

Considering the new jet won't be delivered for at least another 5 years, we have no idea who our President and what our foreign policies will be.

But given our track record on foreign policy for the past 60 years, you're still probably right.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/19/us/politics/trump-musk-air-force-one-boeing.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU4.ewhD.8P8WDMcfhmAt&smid=url-share

I can't possibly see any downside to forcing Boeing into a rush job to built me a new jet, nope. Seems totally safe.

Ha, that’s valid. But it is another of many examples where industry does whatever it wants (3 years behind schedule, GTFO!) and the gov is supposed to just smile and take it up the shorts. This kind of bullshit has to end immediately.