Air Force One

"Montblack" wrote in message .. .
Wrong (IMHO).

The next AF1 will be small and VERY fast. 20 people, tops!

New sonic boom resistant designs, etc.

Mach 2+ a minimum to enter the bidding.


20 people can't even begin to provide presidential support.

What the hell is a sonic boom resistant design?

"Binyamin Dissen" wrote in message ...


:There are over 3500 aircraft that could potentially be Air Force One.

And some of the aircraft, such as helicopters, are Marine One.

Only becuase they belong to the Marine Corps.

"mrtravel" wrote in message ...

The US Govt makes employees fly US carriers when possible, they aren't
about to buy a non US plane.

Really, not in my governement service. The only qualification was price.

"John Harlow" wrote in message
...

Problem there. He deserves no more special treatment than you or I.


You're entitled to your opinion. There is an operational priority for ATC
services, the president isn't at the top, but he's not far down the list.


FAA Order 7110.65N Air Traffic Control

Chapter 2. General Control

Section 1. General

2-1-4. OPERATIONAL PRIORITY

Provide air traffic control service to aircraft on a "first come, first
served" basis as circumstances permit, except the following:

NOTE-
It is solely the pilot's prerogative to cancel an IFR flight plan. However,
a pilot's retention of an IFR flight plan does not afford priority over VFR
aircraft. For example, this does not preclude the requirement for the pilot
of an arriving IFR aircraft to adjust his/her flight path, as necessary, to
enter a traffic pattern in sequence with arriving VFR aircraft.

a. An aircraft in distress has the right of way over all other air
traffic.

REFERENCE-
14 CFR Section 91.113(c).

b. Provide priority to civilian air ambulance flights "LIFEGUARD." Air
carrier/taxi usage of the "LIFEGUARD" call sign, indicates that operational
priority is requested. When verbally requested, provide priority to military
air evacuation flights (AIR EVAC, MED EVAC) and scheduled air carrier/air
taxi flights. Assist the pilots of air ambulance/evacuation aircraft to
avoid areas of significant weather and turbulent conditions. When requested
by a pilot, provide notifications to expedite ground handling of patients,
vital organs, or urgently needed medical materials.

c. Provide maximum assistance to SAR aircraft performing a SAR mission.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Providing Assistance, Para 10-1-3.

d. Expedite the movement of presidential aircraft and entourage and any
rescue support aircraft as well as related control messages when traffic
conditions and communications facilities permit.

NOTE-
As used herein the terms presidential aircraft and entourage include
aircraft and entourage of the President, Vice President, or other public
figures when designated by the White House.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Aircraft Identification, Para 2-4-20.
FAAO 7110.65, Departure Clearances, Para 4-3-2.
FAAO 7210.3, Advance Coordination, Para 5-1-1.

e. Provide special handling, as required to expedite Flight Check
aircraft.

NOTE-
It is recognized that unexpected wind conditions, weather, or heavy
traffic flows may affect controller's ability to provide priority or special
handling at the specific time requested.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Flight Check Aircraft, Para 9-1-3.

f. Expedite movement of NIGHT WATCH aircraft when NAOC (pronounced
NA-YOCK) is indicated in the remarks section of the flight plan or in
air/ground communications.

NOTE-
The term "NAOC" will not be a part of the call sign but may be used when
the aircraft is airborne to indicate a request for special handling.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7610.4, Applications, Para 12-1-1.

g. Provide expeditious handling for any civil or military aircraft using
the code name "FLYNET."

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, FLYNET, Para 9-3-6.
FAAO 7610.4, "FLYNET" Flights, Nuclear Emergency Teams, Para 12-4-1.

h. Provide expeditious handling of aircraft using the code name "Garden
Plot" only when CARF notifies you that such priority is authorized. Refer
any questions regarding flight procedures to CARF for resolution.

NOTE-
Garden Plot flights require priority movement and are coordinated by the
military with CARF. State authority will contact the Regional Administrator
to arrange for priority of National Guard troop movements within a
particular state.

i. Provide special handling for USAF aircraft engaged in aerial sampling
missions using the code name "SAMP."

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, SAMP, Para 9-3-15.
FAAO 7210.3, Atmosphere Sampling For Nuclear Contamination, Para 5-3-4.
FAAO 7610.4, Atmospheric Sampling For Nuclear Contamination, Para 12-4-3.

j. Provide maximum assistance to expedite the movement of interceptor
aircraft on active air defense missions until the unknown aircraft is
identified.

k. Expedite movement of Special Air Mission aircraft when SCOOT is
indicated in the remarks section of the flight plan or in air/ground
communications.

NOTE-
The term "SCOOT" will not be part of the call sign but may be used when
the aircraft is airborne to indicate a request for special handling.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Law Enforcement Operations by Civil and Military
Organizations, Para 9-3-10.
FAAO 7610.4, Applications, Para 12-7-1.

l. When requested, provide priority handling to TEAL and NOAA mission
aircraft.

NOTE-
Priority handling may be requested by the pilot, or via telephone from
CARCAH or the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron (53WRS) operations center
personnel, or in the remarks section of the flight plan.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Weather Reconnaissance Flights, Para 9-3-17.

m. IFR aircraft shall have priority over SVFR aircraft.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Chapter 7, Section 5, Special VFR (SVFR).

n. Providing priority and special handling to expedite the movement of
OPEN SKIES observation and demonstration flights.

NOTE-
An OPEN SKIES aircraft has priority over all "regular" air traffic.
"Regular" is defined as all aircraft traffic other than:
1. Emergencies.
2. Aircraft directly involved in presidential movement.
3. Forces or activities in actual combat.
4. Lifeguard, MED EVAC, AIR EVAC and active SAR missions.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65 OPEN SKIES Treaty Aircraft, Para 9-3-20.
FAAO 7210.3, OPEN SKIES Treaty Aircraft, Para 5-3-7.
Treaty on OPEN SKIES, Treaty Document, 102-37.

o. Aircraft operating under the National Route Program are not subject to
route limiting restrictions (e.g., published preferred IFR routes, letter of
agreement requirements, standard operating procedures).

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, En Route Data Entries, Para 2-3-2.
FAAO 7110.65, National Route Program (NRP) Information, Para 2-2-15.
FAAO 7110.65, Route or Altitude Amendments, Para 4-2-5.
FAAO 7210.3, Chapter 17, Section 17, National Route Program.

p. If able, provide priority handling to diverted flights. Priority
handling may be requested via use of "DVRSN" in the remarks section of the
flight plan or by the flight being placed on the Diversion Recovery Tool
(DRT).

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7210.3, Diversion Recovery, Para 17-4-6.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message thlink.net...

Of course, just as an S3 Viking became Navy1 for a while and
USMC helos are frequently Marine1, any old Coast Guard C130
could be Coast Guard1 in a pinch.


Maybe. When the President is aboard a military aircraft, the name of the
military service is stated, followed by the word "One." But is the USCG
truly a military service? While it has the look and feel of the military,
it isn't part of the Department of Defense.

The Coast Guard describes itself as a "military, multimission, maratine service
and one of the nations five Armed Services."

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

The Coast Guard describes itself as a "military, multimission, maratine
service
and one of the nations five Armed Services."


Well, if one wants to use a broad definition, there are certainly more than
five armed services in the US. If one wants to use a narrow, more
traditional definition, the DoD is divided into just three services; the
Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force.

"John Harlow" writes:

Perhaps it should be a Cessna 172 and be subject to the same hassle as
the
people to whom he is supposedly a "servant".


If a T-41 was used to transport the President it would still be Air Force
One

...no problem there...

and given priority handling.

Problem there. He deserves no more special treatment than you or I.

I don't know where you're going with this. As far as the plane with
the US president goes, I don't have a problem with him getting special
treatment, due to security considerations.

-jav

well... you have NO IDEA what an utter hassle it was to do the 747s for AF-1
in the first place.

Why 747? well... there was a "sort-of" competition between Boeing (747) and
McD (DC-10) to produce the airframe (747 was used as E4B, DC-10 was KC-10,
so they were BOTH in the "inventory" so to speak, the 747 could just "carry
more"). In the end _4_ engines won out over _3_ and _2_ engines were NEVER
considered (since it was Secret Service's policy that "any number 'more than
2' was REQUIRED"). The "other" issue was that the "required load" had been
increasing substantially to where it was necessary to have a small fleet of
aircraft (still have a C-141 or possibly a C-17 haul "stuff" like the limo,
etc) just to get everything there. The 747 allowed most of the "stuff" to
fly in the same aircraft.

Except that it was "The President WILL Fly Boeing", there was absolutely no
financial gain for Boeing (spin-off publicity from seeing el-presidente get
on/off 747s not withstanding) and Boeing spent a LOT of (unreimbursed)
company money to get him on a "Boeing product". Given the choice, Boeing
probably WOULD do another airframe (747-400) but the rules MIGHT be "a bit"
different (like having "engineering decisions" not subject to some idiot
bureaucrat SS decisions which raise cost without reimbursement)

Anyway, since the 707s lasted well past "normal" obsolescence, there is NO
reason to expect that the current 747-200s will be "replaced" any time in
the foreseeable future.

(just my PERSONAL 2cents worth)

"A Guy Called Tyketto" wrote in message
...

I was watching the PBS documentary they were showing this week
about AF1, and as they had shown the progression from the planes used
back in Franklin Roosevelt's tenure as President, to the B707 from
Kennedy to Reagan, to the current AF1 (at least that they showed in the
documentary, since Bush Jr. was in it), to be a B742 variant. It got me
wondering...

The B742 is just about all phased out, with the B744 and the
B777 doing the majority of the long haul runs of the Boeing line (yes,
the 767 series is there, but doesn't have the range of the 747 and
777), So, what would do you think the US gov't would do for the B742's
version of AF1's replacement? Does the Gov't have a contract with
Airbus, which could present the A380? Would they stay Boeing, and go
B772 (the B773 has a shorter range than the 772)? Which aircraft do you
think should be the next Air Force One? Thoughts? Opinions?

BL.
--
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

at the time it was "any number more than _2_"

"Matthew Mayer" wrote in message
...

So, what would do you think the US gov't would do for the B742's
version of AF1's replacement? Does the Gov't have a contract with
Airbus, which could present the A380? Would they stay Boeing, and go
B772 (the B773 has a shorter range than the 772)? Which aircraft do you
think should be the next Air Force One? Thoughts? Opinions?


It might depend on Boeing. IIRC, during the competition for the
VC-25, Boeing effectively said that they would do anything and
everything to win the contract. iow - the President was going
to be flying in a Boeing aircraft.


I vaguely remember somehting about AF1 being required to have four
engines (here's the 2 vs.4 ETOPS argument again...). Urban legend or
not? Think Boeing could hang two extra engines on a Vista-Cruiser or
whatever they've decided to call the 7E7 when the time comes?? :-)

not urban legend, it's true (but "more than _2_", not _4_)

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Matthew Mayer" wrote in message
...

I vaguely remember somehting about AF1 being required to have four
engines (here's the 2 vs.4 ETOPS argument again...). Urban legend or
not?


Urban legend.