4 ms·
One man's quest to restore the first-ever Air Force One
- tocs3 2y agoA beautiful plane.It is to bad they are not flown anymore. Glad to see someone caring for a piece of history.
- fitsumbelay 2y agoI'm just relieved this wasn't a post about sneakers but if it was I hoped for the best. This is a topic I never really ever thought about to be honest. If I were pressed to answer I'd assume the first was FDR or Truman. The US presidency (and govt) gets really weird and interesting right after WW2, this feels like an artifact to that point. Shame I can't find any interior shots online, I'm curious to see a photograph that matches the first paragraph of the post ...
- BadHumans 2y agoI really wanted this to be about the sneaker.
- fitsumbelay 2y agoLOL, like I said if it were and it's on HN I would really hope it has at least one interesting paragraph of content
- w-m 2y agoYou can step inside the first jet-powered Air Force One in the Museum of Flight in Seattle. It’s fully stocked, with meeting rooms and communication equipment and all. My favorite part is the fake temperature control: > President Johnson was finicky about room temperature and when he was VP and developed a habit of haranguing the flight crew about lowering or raising the cabin temperature. After a while the crew got tired of his shenanigans, so they installed a “fake” temperature control in the Conference Room. This appeasement was successful, and Johnson was so pleased with manipulating the controls himself that he didn’t even notice when the temperature remained the same. https://blog.museumofflight.org/quirks-of-the-first-jet-powered-air-force-one https://blog.museumofflight.org/quirks-of-the-first-jet-powe...
- rtkwe 2y agoThe Airforce Museum in Ohio also has a few different early Air Force Ones including at least one you can walk through. https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Presidential-Gallery/ https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Pres...
- kayodelycaon 2y agoI’m pretty there are two you can walk through. I only remember because the smaller one was a really tight squeeze.
- rtkwe 2y agoI remember two yeah I took a 360 cam through them and some day I might chop it up and run it through some photogrammetry to try to make a model of the insides.
- dphidt 2y agoTen total presidential aircraft and four you can walk through at the Dayton USAF museum [1]! You can walk through SAM 26000, the VC-137C used by 8 presidents including Kennedy. Amazing collection. [1] https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Presidential-Gallery/ https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Pres...
- netsharc 2y agoIt reads like it's the Airplane of Theseus...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ryanmcbride 2y agoThat's pretty much the difference between restoration and conservation. It's not about conserving the original parts (though often people restoring something will do that as much as possible) it's about restoring it to what it would have looked like or how it would have worked originally. Both conservation and restoration are important parts of appreciating history.
- bankcust08385 2y agoYesterday, I learned most all outdated presidential limos are destroyed and so aren't present in any museum.
- w-m 2y agoOh, really? I guess here goes my second presidential transportation museum fact of this thread then: you can visit a limousine used by Truman in the Little White House in Key West: https://fla-keys.com/news/article/10941/key-west-visitors-can-ride-in-trumans-presidential-limo-at-little-white-house/ https://fla-keys.com/news/article/10941/key-west-visitors-ca... To me it seemed just like any older car, not anything special. Didn’t realize they are destroying most of them.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoJFK’s limo is still being displayed https://www.grunge.com/827864/what-happened-to-the-car-jfk-was-assassinated-in/ https://www.grunge.com/827864/what-happened-to-the-car-jfk-w...
- sparky_z 2y agoWow, I had no idea that they just repaired it and kept using it as a presidential limo until 1977. That's wild!
- buildsjets 2y agoNot sure why you are being downvoted so severely, as what you say is plainly and verifiably true. JFK and Truman's old jalopies being in museums do not count. They were lightly modified production cars that were not much different than their mass produced counterparts. The Beast is a custom made tank with a Cadillac badge on it and weighs over 20,000 lbs. JFK got shot in some old convertible, which probably did not even have seatbelts. The security technology of those antiques is to The Beast, as the power of a TRS-80 is to a spanky new AMD Ryzen. BTW, they are not just destroyed. They are destroyed in a series of tests of the vehicle's countermeasures and protective devices against an array of potential weapon systems, boom boom kaboom. I got to see some components installed on the gun shock test rig at NTS in Fullerton CA, while I was there doing some unrelated vibration and shock testing on an aircraft system. Unfortunately I did not get to see the kaboom.
- h4x0rr 2y agoI thought it was the Nike shoes lol
- k4rli 2y agoReddit quality comments...
- sdwr 2y agoThis is the single worst HN comment thread I've seen in 5 years.
- fragmede 2y ago> Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html 2007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13852 2007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=60767 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=60767 2007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=60767 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=60767 2007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=66057 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=66057 2008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=289254 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=289254 2008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=253657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=253657 2009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=582513 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=582513 2009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=633099 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=633099
- kurisufag 2y ago[flagged]
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoIs the intention to keep it flying for VIP tours? Why not just focus on the cosmetics instead of the costly real maintenance work? When I see a museum WW2 or older vehicle, I assume the thing can no longer run.
- teruakohatu 2y agoThere is a museum near me that does the required maintenance on some of the planes they have to keep them in theoretical working condition. I like that I am looking at "real" planes, not just empty shells with the guts ripped out or decayed. Maybe one day they will actually be flown. Much easier to restore fully in the future if they are maintained now.
- miketery 2y agoThere’s a difference between not flyable, flyable but not certified, fly able and certified. Each step is a big cost difference. But many hobbyist can get from one to two depending on the tech used. If I recall correctly there’s a guy putting Honda engines inside Cessnas making them much cheaper. But they are not certifiable.
- buildsjets 2y agoI've done business case studies where we can't even make a profitable case to re-engine a Cessna (150) with a newer technology, but already certified aircraft engine, due to the costs involved in the required flight testing, such is the cost burden of certification.
- sidewndr46 2y agoIsn't that intentional?
- wkat4242 2y agoI don't think it's really intentional. Most of the aviation industry would love to get rid of the burden that is leaded avgas. Not to mention the environmentalists, health departments etc. The problem is just that the rules for larger aircraft apply to general aviation too. And the margins there aren't high enough to pay for all the certification. So we're stuck with 1950s tech which would never pass certification today but did at one time in history. It's weird how regulations supposedly intended to make things better are holding us back and stopping innovation to make things safer, more sustainable and efficient.
- darzu 2y agoDamn, I wish they had filmed this restoration and put it all on YouTube, that would have been an incredible channel. Like Tally Ho[0] but for a plane. [0] https://www.youtube.com/@SampsonBoatCo https://www.youtube.com/@SampsonBoatCo
- ricktdotorg 2y agofeel i should push Kermit Weeks' channel[0] because he is the GOAT when it comes to documenting vintage airplane restoration on Youtube [0] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOC84qwgDHkUPwfeLKL40tQ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOC84qwgDHkUPwfeLKL40tQ
- seabass-labrax 2y agoI love this aircraft! It was an amazingly advanced aircraft for its time, which is perhaps not surprising when one discovers that no other than Howard Hughes' TWA funded its development. I can highly recommend the book by Ken Wixey (ISBN 978-0752417660) for a history of both the military and civilian variants; it starts with the Lockheed company's beginnings after the Great War and goes all the way to the Lockheed Starliner (the final variant of the Constellation). Suffice it to say that the model was significantly more reliable than a certain other vehicle with the same name! Also, there's a Super Constellation that you can fly in the FlightGear simulator[1], which is remarkably accurate (and, dare I say, a big challenge to fly). [1]: https://wiki.flightgear.org/Lockheed_Constellation https://wiki.flightgear.org/Lockheed_Constellation
- WalterBright 2y agoWhat a beauty!
- jmclnx 2y agoYou would think the Smithsonian would want it. Glad someone is trying to get it restored.
- fitsumbelay 2y agovery true. strange.
- ryukoposting 2y agoMaybe it has to do with differences in approach? It's basically a Plane of Theseus now, by the sound of it. I imagine that the Smithsonian would care more about "original" than "looks/works the way it did in its own time."
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- fsckboy 2y agook, I understand what planes we're talking about here, and they're interesting, but I do think there's room for the obligatory: "the call sign 'Air Force One' is not for any particular plane, it's the air traffic control sign for any Air Force plane the US President is flying on."
- ianburrell 2y agoAir Force One also refers to the primary presidential aircraft. Words can mean multiple things, and can get attached to adjacent things. It helps that US has been using the same two VC-25 since 1990.
- fsckboy 2y agoI acknowledged what Air Force One was referring to in this discussion and in the article, did you miss that? then I added some information. now I'll add some more, both from wikipedia: Marine One is the call sign of any United States Marine Corps aircraft carrying the president of the United States. It usually denotes a helicopter operated by Marine Helicopter Squadron One "Nighthawks", consisting of either the large Sikorsky VH-3D Sea King or the newer, smaller VH-60N "White Hawk" Air Force Two is the air traffic control designated call sign held by any United States Air Force aircraft carrying the vice president of the United States, but not the president. The term is often associated with the Boeing C-32, a modified 757 which is most commonly used as the vice president's transport. I always try to add information or clarification, knowledge is power.
- kelnos 2y agoI get what you were going for here, but I think to some it might have come across as unimportant pedantry. Perhaps phrasing your initial comment as "Fun fact: the call sign..." would have been better received? I dunno, people are fickle sometimes.
- j33zusjuice 2y agoYou acknowledged that we were discussing specific planes, but did not acknowledge the use of “Air Force One” as valid for discussing a specific aircraft (as shorthand for, “the plane most commonly used for presidential flights, and therefore, most commonly assigned the call-sign ‘Air Force One’”). Maybe that’s what you intended to do, but that is not clear in your original phrasing, which, to me, seemed more like a correction than an addition. Also, to note: I’m not trying to argue any points you’re making. I’m only trying to help clarify how you were misunderstood.
- irjustin 2y agoSeparately the website won't load images if you're using an ad block. Sigh...
- mkl 2y agoWorked fine for me with uBlock Origin.
- supportengineer 2y agoHow is there this much money in Bridgewater, VA, which is apparently a college town near JMU?
- auselen 2y agoIsn’t this like a case of “Ship of Theseus”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
- Lorkki 2y agoI guess in the same sense that every functional aircraft is. Taking everything apart and putting it back together, replacing worn out parts, is considered normal maintenance.
- sailfast 2y agoThis is cool! I do wonder why they didn’t work with the National Museum of the Air Force on this that has a hangar full of them (including Roosevelt’s) and could have helped with the costs.
- ansible 2y agoThe museum has "Columbine III" (a slightly newer Super Constellation), which was also used by Eisenhower. It was delivered to them soon after it was retired in 1966. https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/195805/lockheed-vc-121e-columbine-iii/ https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact... I saw this plane decades ago when it was in an auxiliary hanger, before being moved to its present location. It was in decent shape then (you were allowed to walk through it), and hasn't spent decades sitting outside. Obviously, Columbine III is not in flyable condition, and will likely never fly again.