And the next Air Force One will be..........

a reply to: Iwinder

Weight.

Wake turbulence is also an issue.

a reply to: Iwinder

Weight, wingspan, and footprint. It requires a 60+ foot wide taxiway without a waiver.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Iwinder

Weight.

Wake turbulence is also an issue.

Thanks from a non pilot and a non flyer:-)
Regards, Iwinder

a reply to: Boeing777

Military aircraft are well shielded against EMP.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Iwinder

Weight.

Wake turbulence is also an issue.

Not just weight. It's damn ugly.
I've seen pretty fat girls but the A380 is by far the ugliest thing in the sky. There's hardly anything attractive about it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Not the 747-8 as far as I'm aware of.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Iwinder

Weight, wingspan, and footprint. It requires a 60 foot wide taxiway without a waiver.

One last question Sir "Columbo" what the heck is a waiver.....I am almost right in thinking side to side sway?
Regards, Iwinder

originally posted by: Boeing777

Not just weight. It's damn ugly.

Yeah, I am partial to the look of Boeings, I think they are much prettier aircraft.

I've seen pretty fat girls but the A380 is by far the ugliest thing in the sky. There's hardly anything attractive about it.

The A380 does not do it for me and with the A300 Beluga configuration they should make all bystanders wear a blindfold.

a reply to: Boeing777

Which is why it will be built to military specs. The 767 isn't either but the KC-46 will be.

a reply to: Iwinder

No, it's a paperwork thing.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Iwinder

No, it's a paperwork thing.

You got me by the short ones! I am out of my element here and I am off to leave you nut cases all to yourselves. Thanks to all who responded to my stupid questions.

Many thanks for putting up with me.
Regards, Iwinder

a reply to: Iwinder

The 777X will require it too, but will use folding wingtips in the gate area to fit in smaller airports.

a reply to: Sammamishman

Wouldn't it be funny if some entity took remote control of AF#1 and flew it out over the Southern Indian Ocean? LOL!

a reply to: CharlesT

Yeah, that would be hysterical. [/sarcasm]

Who else here agree's that Air Force One and Marine One should both be glossy black on black as are most of the presidential transports.

How BA would that be.

a reply to: Boeing777

lol. we got one that flies out of Miami International Airport.
Every day I see it flying out between 5:30 and 6 pm.

It reminds me of an orca hunting for seals every time it takes off.


however when does this get made?



I want to see this flying.

originally posted by: Iwinder

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Iwinder

Weight, wingspan, and footprint. It requires a 60 foot wide taxiway without a waiver.

One last question Sir "Columbo" what the heck is a waiver.....I am almost right in thinking side to side sway?
Regards, Iwinder

it is a waiver to be allowed to use the aircraft on runways and taxiways that are not wide enough.

It is because the engines overhang the edges of the sealed section - this means they are prone to sucking up foreign objects from the grass verges and/or less strongly secured fixtures such as runway edge lights, sign boards, etc. They may also cause damage to those area with the suction they create that can affect other aircraft.

A380's with their very wide span between the 2 outboard engines are the big (sic) problem in this instance.

a reply to: Iwinder

How do you learn, if you don't ask?

Zaph is my go to guy on all things aviation... Not to give him a swelled head or anything...

a reply to: seagull

he is quite the font of knowledge isn't he.

imagine what he can't tell us

There are some fun twists to the saga. In 2007 the Air Force approached Airbus about the A380, and this is where it gets fun, as well as Lockheed for a C-5.

Boeing has been named sole source supplier to modify as many as three aircraft, but a contract is not done yet. If they don't sign a contract by the end of the year they may face additional charges as the line is scheduled to end in 2017, and has an 18 month lead time.

www.flightglobal.com...