They ALREADY have purchased a couple of new "Beast's"! So, the limo comes before the hilo's, which comes before the plane. Kind of reminds me of which came first...? :-)

(Written on 27/08/2012)(Permalink)

There have been a lot of good comments and some fun, light-hearted ones. Bringing this ALL back in to perspective... How many jets will have the capacity to have the following defense systems crammed in AND allow for the other things I will mention later? Defenses: chaffing, laser, missiles,guns,EMP shielding,Nuclear shielding,radar "cloaking", not to mention what we don't know about. Capacity: On board secure, and non secure, communications bay, kitchens, sleeping quarters, offices, meeting rooms, Secret Service, armory, surgical bay, spare parts for the aircraft, the "select" media pool (the others get to fly in another aircraft), Airborne Command Capabilities, and lest we forget, THE PRESIDENT and HIS FAMILY (at times). I am sure I left a few out. Location accessibility: Personally, I would LOVE a C-5 fitted for the needs of the President, but not very realistic. Most airports in the world can easily handle a 747-200. A 47-8 is able to get in to even smaller airports,

(Written on 23/08/2012)(Permalink)

I totally concur with toolguy105's assessment. The 47-8 is MUCH more fuel efficient, has a GREAT payload capability, and a greatly reduced sound wake. It can use a SHORTER runway (allowing easier access to smaller runway countries) and it still has the WORLD RECOGNIZED grandeur associated with the POTUS. I, for one, do NOT want AMERICA'S JET to be made MAINLY by a multi-country, EU, company. As it IS America's jet it should be American made. The A380 would allow for a LOT more capacity. That is a given. It would not be able to land in Des Moines, Iowa or Houston, Hobby etc. It needs to be an aircraft which get's the JOB done. That includes visiting MANY smaller airports here at home and abroad. Yes, these are the two absolutely best kept 47-2's in the WORLD, they need replaced. They do NOT operate under the "normal" tolerances of any other 47-2. These two beautiful aircraft have been, an continue to be, pushed to every possible scenario therefore putting EXTREME stress upon EVE

(Written on 17/08/2012)(Permalink)

Alex, thanks for pointing that out to the spelling challenged! I too actually agree they probably just are dealing with unusually strong headwinds and are probably being told to keep the fuel load to the extreme minimum. Thanks again for explaining the abbreviation. HOPEFULLY it will help!

(Written on 22/07/2011)(Permalink)

This is an issue which should easily be resolved. The new 747-800 would easily be able to take the route as should the A-380. GREAT route just need different aircraft. I would take the route BUT I am paying for a NON-STOP!

(Written on 22/07/2011)(Permalink)

once again I find myself completely amazed and furious. This is a service which is paid for. Airlines need to step up and keep their part of the deal. For far too long the airlines charge for services and then barely deliver if they deliver at all. ANY other business would fail miserably if they provided the same quality of product and customer service. Why, as intelligent travelers and business people, do we not demand the same from the airlines as we do from any other business? It really is time to take a stand and say enough is enough. At least Delta apologized and tried to own up to the issue instead of waiting to see if they would HAVE to respond. Thanks Daniel.

(Written on 10/06/2010)(Permalink)

It is refreshing to see someone taking the high road in today's lackluster economy. I personally think this article says a LOT about the CFO for BA. Would you want someone that greedy running the financial portion of your business? Willie Walsh shows, by action, exceptional leadership. Thank you for sharing this article.

(Written on 10/06/2010)(Permalink)