Can you see the US President travelling around on a European manufactured aircraft given the current WTO case? Or is it political suicide?

 

To be honest I think its unlikley.  the USAF is probably just looking to hit Boeing with a big stick ( Baseball bat) to beat the package price for a new AirForce 1 down.  Same aplpies to Lockheed on the C-5.    

Highly, HIGHLY, unlikely. Boeing has an aircraft portfolio that is probably much more suited to the AMC's needs.
If the C-5s are replaced it will be with C-17 and follow-on derivatives,  certainly not the A380. Heck, even the original freighter launch customers, namely FedEx and UPS canceled their orders, or did the esteemed writers at Flight Global forget that little detail?

In the future, the current VC-25 will be replaced by a 747-8i or 777-300, perhaps a 787-10. Even that is at least 10 years away, at best. 

 Why not? After all the President will be flying in a European helicopter in the future....

 

Not bloody likely.

As we are now down to a duopoly in large commercial airframe manufacturers, the AF is just trying to keep Boeing honest.  Can you imagine Congress funding a foreign built AC as AF1? Marine1 not withstanding, AF1 is just too much of a symbol for the nation let alone the world. 

 

The real question is, can you see the US president pulling up in an 747-8i, 777-300 or 787-10 - and the french president trumping him/her with an A380...

I guess it depends on if you believe that bigger is always better. I personally don't. To me, the 747 has much more graceful lines then the A380. As is the case with the 777 and 787.

I agree the 747 and the 777 are both more pleasing to the eye than the A380 but certainly not the delayedliner!

I doubt that a replacement VC-25 would ever be a two engined aircraft so the 777 and 787 would be out of the question. My money would be on the 747-8.

Victor:

I agree the 747 and the 777 are both more pleasing to the eye than the A380 but certainly not the delayedliner!

A380 = delayed

Don't worry, no european leader will fly an A380, here we don't think the bigger the better, especially on these times of budget cuts and efforts asked to the population. And with the environmental concerns it would be seen as a provocation.

I'm not a big fan of the line of the A380, it's too short, but I'm not a big fan of the 747 either, with its ugly bump. I much prefer the A340-500, that's a beauty.

The French government (I'm French) has some A319 ACJ, A330 and A340, some Falcon too, and no intention to change for the moment. There is no equivalent to an AF1 here, each member of the government (and same for the president) take the plane they need for their trip.

I wonder what did you think several years ago, when Mitterrand was president and was flying around in Concorde.

>>Don't worry, no european leader will fly an A380, here we don't think the bigger the better, especially on these times of budget cuts and efforts asked to the population. And with the environmental concerns it would be seen as a provocation.<<

Sorry to say this, but give it six to twelve months when Tony Blair gives up his peace mission to the middle east & becomes El Presidente of the United States of Europe when the new EU constitution is forced through, his first ego trip will be to jump the A380 queue, and have it fitted out with all the toys, knobs, whistles and bells to move his ego & cronies round the world at our expense in the lap of luxury.

 

So people do feel that I am overly cynical at times and think the worst of our politicians...........

 

The only thing that should matter is that the best aircraft wins, cost and nationality should not come into it. I do find it a bit strange that the US would look at Airbus..wonder how Boeing feels about this?...but if you look at the brash of the US then they would want to be the first to have an A380 in presidential role.....BigD i also agree and would not be suprised one bit if the EU constitutions forced throught we see Tony going up the steps of an A380...wonder what scheme he will choose

I certainly hope not, the government has already sold the country out with the tanker deal. Are they really going to sell the American worker out again?

Ronan:

I'm not a big fan of the line of the A380, it's too short, but I'm not a big fan of the 747 either, with its ugly bump. I much prefer the A340-500, that's a beauty.

 

 It's short?? Here is the 747-400 Basic Dimensions
  Wing Span 211 ft 5 in (64.4 m)
  Overall Length 231 ft 10 in (70.6 m)
  Tail Height 63 ft 8 in (19.4 m)

A380 is 73m long, and ~80m wide...

So it's longer than the beloved 747... What you mean (I guess) is that its length to wingspan ratio combined with the height is 'strange'.... well.... world changes get used to it!!!! (I think it's the height..:-) )

Moreover as far as I know planes have to fit in an 80x80m box so don't expect anything longer than the A340-600 anytime soon. Heard that wings of A380 where a challenge due to the 80m restriction..

Planes are made to go from point A to point B, efficiently and safely, its not a beauty contest :-)

 787 looks small in pictures due to bigger windows than what we're used till now ... no?

Planes are made to go from point A to point B, efficiently and safely - its not a beauty contest and small windows are sometimes there for a reason... wonder what Boeing thinks about that?

 

I say chaps, you are all in cloud cuckoo land. With the state of the USA economy, I am convinced that the New Commander-in Chief will go for a fleet of DC-3s with Pratt & Whitney PT-6s. He will set a good example to other world leaders by his inate modesty with the 'common-touch'. And he will be able to land safely in all sorts of grass fields to meet with the ordinary folk of the USA. With extra tanks, the old (but new) DAKOTA will be able to traverse the Atlantic by way of the old WWII route that Ernie Gann and his band of brothers grew so fond of. But, to be realistic, I guess the good old 747 will serve pretty well for international trips; as long as they are very well protected with those anti-missile flares and a fighter escort is provided.

Flightglobal:

The US Air Force yesterday took the first public step in the search for a replacement of the Boeing VC-25 Air Force One, the presidential aircraft fleet. The......

Author: Stephen Trimble

Date: 08 January 2009

Read the full article

..... Boeing delivered the first 707-based VC-137 Air Force One to the White House in 1962 .....

"707-153 (VC-137A) - Three jet transports were bought by the U.S.A.F. 'off the shelf' as standard commercial aircraft instead of being built to a military specification as was customary. Only minor changes to the electrical system and a rearrangement of the interior were incorporated. A special communications station was located forward, ahead of an 8-seat passenger compartment. The centre cabin was arranged as an airborne headquarters, with conference table, swivel chairs, motion-picture projection equipment, and divans convertible to beds. The aft compartment contains 14 reclining passenger seats. Three galleys ant two dressing rooms are provided. The first VC-137A flew on April 7, 1959 and all were assigned to Andrew Air Force Base near Washington, D.C., for the use of VIPs. All were redesignated VC-137B following installation of JT3D-3 fan engines.

C/Ns: 17925/17927

U.S.A.F. Serial Numbers: 58-6970/6972 "

Quoted from: "Boeing Aircraft Since 1916" by Peter M. Bowers (pp. 361-362) - Putnam - London - 1966

58-6970 was displayed at Le Bourget during the 1959 Paris Salon and the public was admitted to visit it.

I had such an opportunity .....

I agree with Goose regarding the issue of choice being that the best aircraft wins. Like it or not, we now live in a Global market and airframers like Boeing have been market leaders for some considerable time.Then along came AirBus with some great technological innovations and slowly caught up with, and in many ways, have really overtaken Boeing. The A380 would surely make a great replacement for Airforce One. Its got 2 FULL decks, more than sufficient to accomodate any future requirements, just as they did when they moved from the 707 model to the 747. Anyway the A380 is in service and proving itself on a daily basis. Where's the 747-8? Has it been designed yet? John.

DO Not expect a Commander-in-Chief flying an Airbus A380 for too many reasons. Using a large airliner is not just like jumping from/to an helicopter. First a President is a super salesman for the industry of his country, two the heavy background of the competition between Airbus and Boeing. Shall I remember too that back in the 50' a french light fighter was selected as winner of a european competition...but the NATO forces choosed to buy the italian Fiat G-91. Be serious. Air Force One must be american, could be canadian, might be brazilian, but will never be european (at least before long).

I doubt AF1 could be twin engined (prohibited since a short use of an Aero Commander), and A380 is too big to be used on any even reasonably sized airport. Don't forget the US President should be able to land anywhere. This why the French President is using a Falcon. I think the ideal craft do not exist and then the 747-8 should be the most realistic and economic choice.        

Some valid points there - AF1 should definitely be a four engined aircraft.

With a correct approach technique and tyre pressure reduction you might be surprised where a 4-jet can sneak into

 

Obama represented the State of Illinois as a senator which just happens to be the state where Boeing has its headquarters. While not impossible Airbus would have to overcome some serious obstacles. I would like to see more manufacturers join the large aircraft business. How about a merger between Lockheed ( commercial ) and Antonov developing a very large composite turbo prop for cargo>>>>

I reckon there is more chance of Boeing offering 2 for the price of 1 on 787's.

 This is how the A380 will look as Air Force One:

 

Well, they need to decide before too long or no one will not know which one is witch.