Qatar-gifted Air Force One may be security, upgrade disaster

Dks01

vaxvms If the plane goes to his presidential library if/when he leaves the White House what does the library do with it? Truck it from an airport to the library grounds to put it on display?

It would need a Very Big Hanger. A Really Big Hanger. The Biggest Hanger. Bigger than any Hanger Ever Built. A Huge Hanger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-137C_SAM_26000

Dks01

egeezer Could it do this?

https://www.twz.com/25694/the-time-air-force-one-took-evasive-maneuvers-to-defend-itself-against-syrian-migs

Dks01

Buy 150 new Boeing jets, trade in one old 747 and get a discount.

Qatar Airways is set to announce that it secured an agreement to purchase 150 aircraft from Boeing while President Trump is in Doha on Wednesday, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to NewsNation.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5298559-qatar-airways-boeing-agreement-trump/

Astyanax

egeezer Add to the list the fact that the Qatari plane is 12 years old and the maintenance records could be suspect.

So what? Even if they are the plane is free and it flies which is more than can be said for the new ones Boeing can’t deliver. Fixing whatever mechanical shenanigans they may find in their inspection is going to be cheaper than paying Boeing for a new one and how much of that could there be? How deep do you look into your gift horses’ mouths?

The economic argument against it literally “doesn’t fly” and is just completely laced with Trump hate. The only one with any merit against it is the ethical/Emoluments Clause one and that is only determined by who the final owner of the plane is after Trump is out of office: Trump or the Feds. The Emoluments Clause issue can also be rendered moot by both Republican-controlled houses of Congress if they simply vote that Trump can have it for himself or whatever conditions they want to place on it.

Frankly I don’t believe this plane will ultimately ever become Air Force 1 or have anything to do with Trump. The Feds will take possession of it and just make use of it as a standard 747 and give Trump the current Air Force 1 for his library if he really wants such a colossus to maintain and house. There’ll be no historical significance to the free one unlike the current one except for all the controversy in acquiring it so why would he want to purposely inject that into his library and legacy?

Astyanax

Dks01 It would need a Very Big Hanger. A Really Big Hanger. The Biggest Hanger. Bigger than any Hanger Ever Built. A Huge Hanger.

Why would the hangar have to be any bigger than standard 747s have been using for the past half+ century?

The only reason why it would need to be bigger is to display other aircraft and artefacts from his presidency.

If anything I’m sure A380 and blimp hangars are a lot "YUGE"er.

Dks01

Astyanax There are two surplus hangers at the now closed Loring AFB (SAC) outside of Limestone, Maine that could be used. They are among the biggliest hangers ever built. They are the Arch Hanger, built to handle two B-36 bombers (the Arch Hanger) and the DC Hanger, which could house five B-36 bombers. Either one could handle a 747 with ease and are already owned by the US Government. I have been in both on several occasions. The photo is of a C-5A, the largest aircraft in the US inventory, in front of the Loring DC Hanger.

Astyanax

Dks01 There are two surplus hangers at the now closed Loring AFB (SAC) outside of Limestone, Maine that could be used. They are among the biggliest hangers ever built. They are the Arch Hanger, built to handle two B-36 bombers (the Arch Hanger) and the DC Hanger, which could house five B-36 bombers. Either one could handle a 747 with ease

We’re talking about housing a single plane and maybe Marine 1 if the Feds give that to him too if he wants it. I know there are bigger buildings that can house multiple aircraft at a time. Boeing’s plant in Everett where they originally built 747s I think was the largest enclosed building in the world for awhile if it isn’t still where they could build 3 747s at a time.

px_eliezer_

Astyanax The Emoluments Clause issue can also be rendered moot by both Republican-controlled houses of Congress if they simply vote that Trump can have it for himself or whatever conditions they want to place on it.

There is much opposition in the Senate from BOTH sides.

Dks01

Astyanax There is always the Reagan Library approach. It’s biggly.

r81984

The main difference between Trump and Reagan is Trump wants to immediately take the plane while still president. Reagan did not take Airforce one when he was in office. It was also not a gift from a foreign government either. In fact, the Reagan library knew the 707 former airforce one was being retired and fought to get it in 2000/2001. They got the donation in 2001 for a static display. That is 12 years after Reagan left office.
Trump made a deal to get the airplane and have it automatically donated to his library in 2029 before he leaves office. The real question is what is his plan to be able to personally use it after it is donated to his library. No one knows what his real plan is at this point. Everyone doubts it will be just gutted and put on static display.

There is no way for this qatar aircraft to be securely used as airforce one. It will take a few years to strip it down and rebuild for security. But… since trump does not care about security, he will force the secret service and DOD to let him use it anyways. Congress will not stop him. It wont matter that using this aircraft will break all security standards.

Boeing now says the new Airforce One will be delivered in 2027, 3 years late from original contract for 2024 (original contract time was from 2018 to 2024).
The ironic part of for the reason of the Boeing delays was they converted 2 passenger 747s from canceled orders and they basically admitted it would have been faster to build a new aircraft from scratch. But they also had the same supply chain issues everyone else had during covid.
This qatar situation is just another mess of corruption. Trump seems to be pissing off the entire world except middle eastern countries and russia.

Now if he wanted the existing airforce one to go to his library as a static display, after it is retired, then most would not care. Some would complain. But it at least would not have been corrupt.
In the end, congress has made it clear they will let Trump do whatever he wants.

Beachie

Astyanax How deep do you look into your gift horses’ mouths?

😉

dave

If, as seems likely, a gift plane need to have all sorts of extra hardware installed to make it secure, doesn’t a lot of it need to be removed (or at least incapacitated) before it gets parked in some hypothetical library? It seems like there’s potential for an intelligence leak (i.e., revealing what we do to secure AF1) once the plane is no longer under military protection.

Seems a bit short-sighted for what, 2 or 3 years actual use.

MacLeech

dave No worries. Trump won’t even get to use it as president. The Air Force (who maintains and operates the presidential aircraft FLEET, not including the rotary wing fleet) will ground it, if they even accept it. The military is very good at dragging out timelines for things they don’t want to do. The presidential library will get ONE of the current aircraft used as Air Force One which Trump has flown on after it’s retired.

egeezer

Astyanax The economic argument against it literally “doesn’t fly” and is just completely laced with Trump hate.

Boeing is years and millions if dollars into the construction of new AF1s. The specs call for a custom built from the ground up aircrafts that only resemble a productipn 747 on the outside.

Imagining that the Qatari plane can be contracted, torn apart and rebuilt to specs by trusted rebuilders before the new Boeing AF1s are complete is unrealistic.

My concerns are what is economically feasible and a risk to national security and has no relevance to “Trump hate” regardless of how much you want to make it so.

egeezer

dave Seems a bit short-sighted for what, 2 or 3 years actual use.

It would require selecting a contractor with the proper experience and security clearance who would dismantle and rebuild it to AF1 specs.

At this point, only Boeing has the equipment, facilities, personnel and security clearance for such a project.

It might be useful to te military if retrofitted as a cargo or MATS carrier, but the airframe, avionics, controls, and even the skin for AF1s are customized for physical hardening, security, extra weight and power needed for the aircraft.

egeezer

Dks01 It would need a Very Big Hanger. A Really Big Hanger. The Biggest Hanger. Bigger than any Hanger Ever Built. A Huge Hanger.

The USAF Museum in Dayton has several presidential aircraft in hsngar four.
https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Presidential-Gallery/

It is a really bigly hangar, as is the Goodyear Airdock in Akron OH.

Dks01

egeezer that would work. The DC hanger may be bigglier. There are several similar DC hangers sitting on BRAC’d SAC bases in the US and two other Arch Hangers. Loring is best because it is colder, more remote and Aroostook County needs a major tourist trap as an economic driver. There is also an old nuclear storage area there which is now a wildlife sanctuary.

JRB-Ware

egeezer Boeing is years and millions if dollars into the construction of new AF1s.

Boeing is years behind and millions of dollars over budget.

Boeing is not exactly an example of who should be relied upon any more for this sort of thing. Boeing should be paid for whatever work done so far and the “new” AF1s should be confiscated as government property whatever state they are in and existing Boeing contracts terminated. Contract out the remaining work to companies without so many recent performance issues.

MacLeech

JRB-Ware who would you suggest take over US government wide-body aircraft production? What companies exactly?

egeezer

JRB-Ware
What other American company has the resources, national security trustworthiness and experience building or an AF1 aircraft, or retrofitting a used 747 with questionable maintenance from a foreign nation with ties to Hamas?

If it takes Boeng that long to build AF1, how long and how much will it take a new company to tear down and rebuild the 12 year old Qatari plane? Until these questions are conclusively answered, there should be no taxpayer funding on this plane.

And, it’s a gift to taxpayers, and should remain taxpayer property unless sold at fair market value to private interests. Any other arrangement would be waste and fraud upon taxpayers.

My own choice would be decommissioning and stripping it, auctioning off the furnishings at govdeals etc. and converting the airframe to cargo for MATS. The money from the sales would be returned to the military to offset reconfiguration costs.

« Previous Page Next Page »