You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Military Aviation

The White House is in discussions with the royal family of Qatar to possibly receive a luxury jumbo jet, intended for use as a presidential plane on Air Force One.

In a statement, Qatar denied that the plane would be a gift, but said the transfer of an aircraft for "temporary use" was under discussion between the two countries.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy5ell3gkxvo

What's wrong with the current two, that can't wait for Boeing's 2027-28 delivery date?

Don't suggest boneyard A380s, don't suggest boneyard A380s, don't suggest boneyard A380s, don't suggest boneyard A380s, don't suggest boneyard A380s...

If that kind of thing was even accepted, I'm kinda guessing it would go through an immediate D check to inspect every part for security purposes.

I don't like this "deal" one bit and it should be blocked...but probably won't.

ShanwickOceanic wrote:What's wrong with the current two, that can't wait for Boeing's 2027-28 delivery date?

Assuming that Boeing can actually deliver in 2027-2028, which is doubtful, since they've proven they can't get their act together on any of their products lines, the issue that I'm aware of with the current fleet is spare parts availability. The aircraft are meticulously maintained and have plenty of life left...but actual parts are getting scarce. We've kept B-52s and C-135s in the air far beyond their projected services lives, I don't see why we can't keep a couple of 747s flying a bit longer.

Honestly, I'd rather see POTUS in the VC-32s than the ex-Qatari 748. There's a whole host of legal issues that are already popping up, nearly all of them this country doesn't need to be drug through. I read somewhere, and can't seem to find it now, that this is a move by Trump to put pressure on Boeing to get their act together. If that's true, I don't think it'll work. Boeing has shown no real interest in improving themselves and they barely even acknowledge the obvious problems.

As a retired aerospace engineer, in my opinion it is doubtful the Qatari 747-8 would ever be used as Air Force One, or even for VP and other Senate/House officials for that matter for which it is simply too big for. Just to protect it from any EMP they'd have to disassemble the plane and rebuild it. And, it is not a "green" airplane direct from the factory so extra work is involved. Plus, with the two, brand new VC-25s already in the build process there is no reason to spend the money to start another one. Park it at the Trump library and use it for spare parts if needed. Heck, lease it out and make some money. No one can argue that Boeing hasn't had its issues. This is a massive company (THE single largest exporter in the U.S.) and it takes time to "turn the ship around". COVID and supply issues have affected ALL BUSINESSES. No question the new CEO has his work cut out for him but what I've heard so far he's on the right track. They will not bounce back overnight. It could take maybe 5 years. They have learned some very hard lessons and hopefully have learned from those.

Honestly, I think we should definitely take the airplane. What we do with it is another story.

I have heard Boeing is giving some ridiculous timelines for the two they have had sitting at Kelly for years already. If this can be up and running as a stopgap great. There's a chance the existing VC-25s may be struggling with parts or some other issues that are not being spoken about.

I think Sierra Nevada is still chasing down airframes for the new E-4s they are putting together in DAY. This would be a great candidate to be completely taken apart and put back together for that project.

Not that many 747-800s were built. Worst case, it's a great source of parts.

I don't think there is any refusing it. The bird is sitting at SAT as of a few days ago.

captoveur wrote:If this can be up and running as a stopgap great.

It can't. At best, it'll be starting the conversion process at the same point the other two 748s are at, at worst it's very far behind the other two in the process.

airplaneguy11 wrote:use it for spare parts if needed

captoveur wrote:Worst case, it's a great source of parts.

Spare parts would be a good use for the aircraft, but it would be a PR and diplomatic nightmare.

airplaneguy11 wrote: No one can argue that Boeing hasn't had its issues. This is a massive company (THE single largest exporter in the U.S.) and it takes time to "turn the ship around".

The problem is that there was no way the VC-25A replacement program was going to go to any other company. Sure, we "almost" had Airbus tankers, but we all know that process and the "rebid" has (or still has) issue. Realistically, Airbus never really had a shot selling us tankers and certainly never had a shot to provide the next "Air Force One." There was no reality in which Boeing wouldn't have the VC-25B contract and therefore no real incentive to actually fight it to win or keep it.

Boeing will not turn the ship around, not because they can't, but because they don't want too. The VC-25B program will not be cancelled, nor taken away from them and given to anyone else. They bid it fixed cost, so they know that they'll lose money on it no matter what, so there's absolutely zero incentive to actually get those aircraft in the air anytime soon. Boeing will deliver them when they absolutely ^&*%(ing feel like it.

airplaneguy11 wrote:COVID and supply issues have affected ALL BUSINESSES.

Well, this is 2025 and that excuse is wearing very thin. Boeing promised a product/service and has repeatedly failed to deliver, pinning the blame on everything but themselves.

airplaneguy11 wrote:They have learned some very hard lessons and hopefully have learned from those.

They have not. There's no incentive for them to learn and improve.