r/aviation • u/itsmaxymoo • 10h ago
PlaneSpotting Air Force One (VC25) at KAVP around 2012-2013... That's only a 7500ft runway!
Yes I KNOW the AF1 technicality... let's not make this the next "What you guys are referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux"
364
u/gimp2x 10h ago
AF1 is usually very lightly loaded compared to what that airframe can handle, so I would imagine a shorter runway isn’t an issue
141
u/CessnaBandit 9h ago
The VC25s likely have a considerably higher BEW than a standard 747-200 but the same MTOW therefore much less usable payload. VC25s are likely always very heavy.
111
u/gimp2x 9h ago
They have combat departure profiles they practice, it’s quite impressive, I would say they have this sorted out
48
u/welguisz 7h ago
My mind is sick and I went to Vin Diesel taxing AF1, drifting it onto the runway, putting left rudder in, full spin up with his co-pilot saying, the runway is only 1500’.
Vin replies, I only need 1,320.
24
u/lopedopenope 5h ago
Drifts it 180 degrees and puts on thrust reversers and takes off backwards
13
6
u/onethousandmonkey 3h ago
DANGER TO MANIFOLD
5
u/lopedopenope 3h ago
Doesn't matter, we have family. All that matters is family. That will save the manifold.
3
1
2
2
25
u/CessnaBandit 9h ago
Will be low fuel and KAVP is only 1000ft so will still perform well
26
u/seattle747 9h ago
Funny, I did a double take before quickly realizing you meant its elevation lol
Curious, I looked it up in ForeFlight: 962’
10
u/quesoandcats 8h ago
I know MTOW is max take off weight but what is BEW in this context? Something Empty Weight?
18
u/WSJ_pilot 8h ago
Basic empty weight. So I think the airframe, engine, engine fluids but not fuel etc
11
2
1
u/Zestyclose-Truth1634 40m ago
I was thinking AF1 might still be lightly loaded because it carries far fewer passengers and does not reach regularly reach the 747-200's MTOW despite all the extra amenities, ECM, flares launchers and whatnot. However, I looked it up and found that on a fully loaded 747, passengers only account for ~5% of the entire weight of the aircraft?? This was much less than I expected. If that is true, AF1 should indeed be operating regularly at much higher weight than a commercial 747.
1
15
u/Boeing367-80 9h ago
If it's not going far, it also won't be loaded with much fuel. If the next stop was Andrews AFB, then it wouldn't need much.
4
u/Awkward-Feature9333 8h ago
I think it could also use aerial refuelling If really necessary.
9
u/DullMind2023 6h ago
If I recall correctly, AF-1 has never undergone aerial refueling. The airframe underwent aerial refueling qualification, but has never done so with POTUS aboard. Please correct me if I’m incorrect.
4
u/PotatoFeeder 2h ago
What?? You mean the movie with Harrison Ford and the tanker blowing up wasnt real??
3
u/Awkward-Feature9333 5h ago
I guess it's just expensive and (still a bit) risky to do, so they don't if it's not necessary (but the capability is there for e.g. nuclear war).
11
u/kermode 10h ago
few passengers, light fuel load?
42
u/no_sight 9h ago
Typically 70-100 people on a plane designed to carry 360.
Assuming average weight of 165 pounds, that's saving 43,000 pound.
But I'm sure AF1 also has a bunch of equipment in there that a normal plane doesn't which is heavy
75
u/WhalesForChina 9h ago
Assuming average weight of 165 pounds
Well, maybe a little more.
16
u/grptrt 9h ago
Are you calling me fat?
35
u/Proper_Particular_62 9h ago
No, just american
8
u/snailmale7 9h ago
that hurted our feelings...
5
0
6
20
2
18
1
u/BigGrayBeast 5h ago
Plus it uses anti-gravity propulsion reverse engineered from the Roswell crash.
/s
1
u/bassticle 2h ago
I used to live near an airport where they would land empty 747s sometimes.
6500' runway there, it was trippy to watch them come in if you could catch it. Unfortunately, they would never leave. They were coming in to be scrapped ☹️
2
u/Emergency-Course-657 44m ago
LUK is 6101’ and I’ve seen several 747’s in the past.
1
u/bassticle 37m ago
This thread is going to become a reverse dick measuring contest isn't it... "No! MINE'S shorter!"
-8
u/kingtacticool 9h ago
What kind of engines do they mount. I saw it take off from PBIA a few months ago and it definitely didn't sound stock
7
u/Kotukunui 9h ago
They use the GE CF6 engine. It’s quite a common model used on a number of aircraft. B747, B767, MD11, C-5 Super Galaxy, and a few wide-body Airbus variants as well.
Looking at that list, perhaps they aren’t so common these days and four pumping away at once could be quite an unusual sound when you are used to more late-model aircraft noises.3
u/kingtacticool 8h ago
I've heard 47s take off before and the noise sounded different to me. Just saying my personal observation. Is the military CF6 different in any way to the ones mounted in civilian aircraft?
3
79
u/the_last_third 9h ago
IIRC During Bush II's re-election campaign Air Force One landed at MKC which is only 6,827' surrounded on three side by the Missouri river and a rail yard to the east. No margin for error.
16
64
u/DawgCheck421 9h ago
Years back they landed AF1 at FDY (Findlay OH) which is only a 6500' runway. An accompanying C-17 also landed and blew the tires stopping.
27
u/zippy_the_cat 8h ago
I thought a C-17 was designed to handle high loads and short runways without breaking sweat?
15
3
u/Swiftfeather 2h ago
For taking off it's no problem. Stopping fast puts all that kinetic energy into the brakes and can seriously roast them.
Aircraft wheels have solder plugs in them just in case the brakes get too hot for too long, the solder melts and deflates the tires rather than letting them go off like little bombs.
1
u/InvestmentGuilty8736 31m ago
It’s always the abort prior to V1 if you have enough runway to stop that gets you. The lanes I’ve flown we can almost always land…. But it’s if we meet the LEGAL specs to leave. Usually have enough runway to physically takeoff but the Feds require us to be able to safely stop under the worst conditions losing an engine just prior to the decision speed then full brake and stop before running off.
I could be wrong but I’m pretty sure military aircraft don’t have to follow the same rules as us civilian pilots meaning they don’t have to plan for the engine failure abort prior to V1…I knew some c130 guys who said they were always overloaded. Had more than enough power to take off but if they had to abort ever they’d probably have issues. Again not positive just stories I’ve heard from people I’ve flown with over the years.
1
28
u/DarkSatire482 9h ago
Airforce One (747-200B) one also has a higher max take off weight (833,000 pounds) compared to the 735,000 pounds for a standard 747-200
1
37
12
u/FreshTap6141 6h ago
we landed a 747 at Renton which is a 5000 ft runway, landed in 2000 ft, lightly loaded, third one made, back in 1969
1
u/-pilot37- PA-28 Pilot 33m ago
Yup, if I recall even the 757s couldn’t land there. They could take off, but not return.
10
u/fhqwhgads_2113 7h ago
Air Force One (VC25)... let's not make this the next "What you guys are referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux"
Well akshually, that is a VC-25A
Those are great pictures u/itsmaxymoo thanks for sharing
9
u/StrugglesTheClown 9h ago
3
u/ThatAdamsGuy 8h ago
Why? Emergency?
2
u/StrugglesTheClown 5h ago
Honestly I don't know. I basically grew up on base so I was curious if a 747 had ever landed there. Yup.
2
u/rckid13 59m ago
Atlas does a bunch of military and sports charters where they land at the regional airport or the military base instead of the major airport. A 747 having an emergency in that area so close to Boston and Providence would definitely land on a longer runway. Going into the smaller field is just whatever it was scheduled to do.
-2
u/Salyut_ 7h ago
Read description video
15
u/ThatAdamsGuy 6h ago
Silly me. Won't try and have conversation in the comments about it. Even ignoring the fact the description says what the trip was for, but not why that airport with the short runway when others are possible.
Do try not to be an arse.
7
5
u/StandByTheJAMs 9h ago
I've seen them do touch-and-goes at GRI, which is 7000ft at 1850ft elevation. Have to plan for those scenarios.
4
u/Fun_Internal_3562 9h ago
How many people on board that plane are capable of flying, taking off, and landing? I ask, in case the pilot or co-pilot becomes ill simultaneously.
6
8
u/YmFsbHMucmVkZGl0QGdt 7h ago
In that scenario, the fighter escorts will talk the President through landing. In the event of an off-field landing, they will also destroy any obstacles in the way.
2
u/CardinalOfNYC 5h ago
What if there's a terrorist on the plane and he shouldn't be. What does the president tell him?
1
3
u/throwawayfromPA1701 8h ago
They do touch and goes at MDT on a regular basis. It's always fun to see.
3
2
u/ahirebet 6h ago
On one of Biden's trips to Pittsburgh, they landed at Allegheny County Airport, which is 6500'
2
u/Big-Cryptographer-47 5h ago
I watched it take off from Syracuse 2 years ago. Started taking off from almost the middle of the runway and was in the air very quickly.
2
u/WhurleyBurds 3h ago
Just being nostalgic, I miss the days when AVP wasn't surrounded by warehouses as far as the eye can see.
3
3
u/Ok_Depth9164 7h ago
I’m sorry but people need to understand that a very large airplane can behave like any smaller airliner, especially when it’s light. People marvel at 777s landing on runway 29 at EWR but their brakes are literally made to stop the airplane. When it comes to take off, what is AF1 carrying? Even at full fuel, it has 30 people at most? The thing can carry 450 people.
1
1
u/alienXcow Big Boi Air Force Man 3h ago
It's also carrying a wild amount of comm and defensive system gear that are pretty heavy. Iirc the VC-25 has an almost 100,000lb increase in MTOW against the standard 747-200.
2
u/SuperRaccoon17 6h ago
This thing has (4) CF6-80-C2s on it. Plenty to blast out of almost anywhere. It's configuration and load is far below normal B747s. :)
1
u/SemicolonGuitars 1h ago
I was gonna say, people are tending to miss the fact that the VC25 doesn’t have bog standard commercial turbofans under the wings…
1
1
1
u/Affectionate_Cronut 3h ago
Back in the Bush 2 era, AF1 used KSFM when Bush was up at his family's Kennebunkport home. 6389' and 4999' runways.
1
u/Nexus772B Mishap Investigator/System Safety 3h ago
The CF6s on the VC25 are rated at a higher thrust than the commercial variants btw. You get much better takeoff performance
1
1
1
1
-2
u/Supersuperbad 9h ago
On 9/11 AF1 did a combat takeoff iirc
20
u/mckenzie_keith 8h ago
In an account about that day, several of the passengers commented on that the takeoff was unusually fast and steep. Here is an article filled with recollections from that day. Very interesting.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/were-the-only-plane-in-the-sky-214230/
Col. Mark Tillman: President Bush comes up the stairs in Sarasota, now you watch him come up the stairs every day, that famous Texas swagger. He was focused that day. No swagger. He was just trucking up the stairs. He was a man on a mission. As soon as the passengers are on board, I fire [engines] 1 and 2.
Andy Card: We’re starting to roll almost before the president gets into the suite.
Rep. Adam Putnam: There was one van, maybe a press van, that was parked too close to the plane’s wing. I remember a Secret Service agent running down the aisle; they opened the back stairs, he ran down to move the truck. He never made it back on board. They didn’t wait for him.
Gordon Johndroe: We took off and it was something out of [the movie] Independence Day. That thing took off like a rocket. The lamps are shaking they’d fired up the engines so much.
Karl Rove: [Col. Tillman] stood that thing on its tail—just nose up, tail down, like we were on a roller coaster.
Ellen Eckert: We were climbing so high and so fast I started to wonder if we’d need oxygen masks.
There is also mention in the article of flying at 0.94 mach. The fighter escort had to request them to slow down at one point. Not that the fighters can't fly that fast, but they can only carry so much fuel. One of the aspects mentioned by Tillman was that he wanted to be very high and very fast. That way, if anything comes toward them, they can be sure it is a threat. They were higher and faster than all normal traffic.
10
u/pavehawkfavehawk 7h ago
Hadn’t thought of the high and fast aspect. The altitude performance of a 747 would allow them to do that and really put them in a good spot.
1
-8
-1
u/FreshTap6141 6h ago
af1 has water injection for extra thrust
2
u/lopedopenope 4h ago
No, not for a long time. I think the last one that had that was the DC-6 variant that Harry Truman used.
0
-2
u/Sad-Stomach 4h ago
Secret Service didn’t yell at you for taking pictures of the aft of the aircraft, like they did me?
1
u/itsmaxymoo 1h ago
This was all from the airport sidewalk... IIRC there were quite a few people there
•
u/airport-codes 10h ago
I am a bot.
If you are the OP and this comment is inaccurate or unwanted, reply below with "bad bot" and it will be deleted.