The competition amongst US commercial passenger plane builders must be practically non existent. McDonnell Douglas their main rival went down the road long ago so the prestige factor isn't that big a deal I would think.

The Queen on the other hand could request an AB 380 stick her tongue out at Donald "mine's bigger than yours Donald na ne na ne na"

There's no way the new VC-25 wouldn't be based on the 747-8, of course. Though the thought of the Trumpster flying around in a French plane did make me laugh.

Well, yes it is, since Boeing is the only one. Boeing and MD merged in 1997 and all the other aircraft manufacturers in the US are either in the military or general aviation fields.

It is a flying advertisement for them..so yes..a big deal.

Just reading through the last 2 pages and am I glad someone finally said that

It's an extended airframe, with new avionics, but it's hardly 21st century tech.

If the 787 had been a little longer it would have been chosen I think.... only the fact it's missing half the engines of a Jumbo probably went against it.

Anyone notice the back of the chair is all messed up? Strange choice for a magazine cover!

There was a fascinating story released recently about the President's movements on 9/11, largely focusing on AF1. Turns out they could not receive any TV stations other than terrestrial broadcasts, when flying low near populated areas, so had no idea what was going on with CNN/etc. They also had great difficulty making phone calls, struggling to reach key govt. people, and they could not send/receive any email. Overall, the communications infrastructure on AF1 was sadly lacking. Probably not a huge part of the budget, but an interesting insight.

Yeah, that was interesting. There is a subliminal message about something looking shiny and nice from a distance but having terrible (not so hidden) failings.

I think I saw, out of the corner of my eye, the Time photo shoot and it actually looked like they took that photo in the lobby of Trump Tower. There was a bunch of shiny gold/black/marble/shiny/shinola/shit/gold going on in the background. Obviously they changed the background but, also obviously, left the battered chair-back alone in the cover photo.

Here's an idea. Don't cancel a new AF1, Keep the new AF1 and cancel Trump.

Would it be too difficult/too costly to set up a temporary A380 line at the A320 assembly line in Alabama?

I know nothing about these lines, just wondering.

I would keep my powder dry because we don't know what he's going to do until he gets bye the electoral college and takes the oath of office.

His team will eventually explain to him why a new AF One is needed equipped with the very latest state of the art equipment on board after they've given him a floor map of the White House showing where the Oval office is

They're wearing shoe-covers and there wasn't a better chair in the place for the president-elect to sit on?!

TIME Person of the Year: Behind the Donald Trump Cover

I suppose if they wanted to go the twin engine route, there are 777 variants that would be more than adequate size-wise, when compared to the 747-200. I think you're right that they want the redundancy of 4 engines, even with the ETOPS ratings of the 777-XXXER airframes.

That and (at least to me anyway) the 747-8 is a great looking plane.

The current VC-25s were essentially obsolete even back then, so yeah, basically everything needs updating. Now, you can bung on bits and pieces here and there, like LCD gauges in the cockpit or even new engines, but 'patching up with duct tape', while fine for freighters, is not exactly ideal when it comes to ferrying the President all around the world.

Probably not, as demonstrated by Boiler's picture of the size difference. If they had a plant that made A340s in the US, then perhaps adaptations could be made.

However, as pointed out earlier, there's no way the US Government is going to give the VC-25 contract to a European manufacturer, even if it was to be built in the US.