يستخدم موقع الويب هذا ملفات تعريف الارتباط. باستخدام موقع الويب هذا وعمل المزيد من عمليات التنقل خلاله، يعني هذا قبولك لملفات تعريف الارتباط.
استبعد
هل علمت بأن خاصية تتبع الرحلة التابعة لـFlightAware مدعومة بواسطة الإعلانات؟
يمكنك مساعدتنا بالإبقاء على موقع FlightAware مجاني بدون مقابل من خلال السماح بالإعلانات من موقع FlightAware.com. نحن نعمل بكل كد لجعل إعلاناتنا ملائمة ومناسبة وأن تكون هذه الإعلانات غير ملحوظة من أجل إنشاء تجربة رائعة. يمكن بكل سرعة وسهولة السماح لـإعلانات القائمة البيضاء الموجودة على FlightAware، أو الرجاء مراجعة الحسابات المميزة الخاصة بنا.
استبعد
Back to Squawk list
  • 59

Air Force One Paint Job

تم الإرسال
 
The House want the final say if President Trump decides to change Air Force One’s paint job from the blue-and-white livery that has adorned presidential planes for more than a half century. (www.defenseone.com) المزيد...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Gordo412
Gordon Musch 9
AF-1 flys to LKangley AFB in Hampton-Newport News Virginia. Now it flys to Virgnia to perform and practice full power and very steep climbs. It frequently flys over the James River. And you know what, when AF-1 flys over a boat with 100 touristson board it shuts them all up like nothing else. It is the MOST RECOGNIZABLE paint scheme/color. You can see the seal on the door. And it is IMPRESSIVE when it looks like it is 200 feet from you. That color scheme is a symbol of the United States of America. It is INSTANTLY recognizable all over the world. I vote keep it as it is. It is a proud symbol of America. And I have never seen a bunch of tourists shut up like that when it flys over them at full power and what looks like a 65% climb. It is a sight I will never forget. And it is the blue that sets it apart.
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 2
Military aircraft also fly the pattern at Patrick Henry International (that is the name of the place when we first moved 2 miles from the end of the runway after Pops retired from Langley). Any place that accepts federal funds cannot stop miitary aircraft from flying into it. Of course, there is an aggressor squadron at PHF as well.
buzzsaw48
Richard Busby 7
Leave it alone. It is elegant and dignified, both of which are in short supply in Washington these days.
damavab
Duncan Mulholland 35
There is absolutely NO reason to change the exterior markings on AF-1. It has become the image of the USA all around the world. It is a dignified paint scheme where dignity is in short supply.
Bobqat
Bob Harrington 6
I like the current scheme, too. Only possible tweak that might be necessary would be because of the longer top bump on the 747-8i (?)
birdf15
John Bird 13
I first saw Air Force 1 at Tan Son Nhut in Saigon in 1963. I will never forget the feeling of pride and patriotism that came over me as a nineteen year old army soldier ten thousand miles from home. That big beautiful blue and white Boeing 707 was America as far as I was concerned. My vote is no, do not change it!
PJSalazar
Must have been awesome indeed. I recall John Paul II's landing at Lourdes, just after the annual world Armed Forces Pilgrimage. It was, against the background of the Pyrenees mountain range, an arresting sight. Planes are 'uplifting'.
stansdds
Michael Stansfield 33
If the paint scheme is left up to Congress to decide, then it will never get painted.
shenghaohan
Shenghao Han 4
Unmarked white is basically never painted... and I think that looks quite bad ass
NF2G
David Stark 1
Incorrect. Bare metal is not white.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 4
I believe he referred to the 2 Transaero craft that Boeing sold the USAF. They were unmarked white.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve -2
Actually it would not look bad..throw the Presidential seal on it near the front (a good sized seal, not some rinky dink thing), trim out the doors and windows, and paint the tail a US Flag
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
Ok why down votes for a nice clean paint scheme. White would look sharp, and having the tail a complete US flag would look great.
Yes I like it the way it is now but if they decide to change it up.....
lynx318
lynx318 9
I guess we won't see til years later what is in this...
‘‘Phase II Aircraft Livery and Paint Study Final Report’ as submitted to the Federal Government in April 2017.”
But I'm thinking the current paint job may be strategic as well as aesthetic as a visual type of camouflage. Painting it gaudy red, white and blue, you may as well paint bulls-eyes on them.
SpaceRanger
Michael McMurtrey 3
Perhaps a Freedom of Information request is in order.
SpaceRanger
Michael McMurtrey 3
And I just submitted one to HQ USAF.
watkinssusan
mary susan watkins 25
the article states the airplane being used as the "new" air force 1,will not be ready until 2024..the "paint job" issue was a news item several months back,and trump was quoted as saying he didn't like the blue color of the aircraft,but did want it to be red white and blue..this isn't really an "aviation" issue,but more of a political one..i believe the cool blue "traditional" color of the aircraft still speaks to the office of the president,so why change it ..it is after all, not the personal aircraft of mr trump,but the peoples airplane as well...

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

md69
Martin Dennett 0
5 downvotes. Hmmm......
ddsteele
Dave Steele 1
Now 15.

Way to step on your own yoke.
md69
Martin Dennett 1
Really don't understand why people are downvoting it. Why should someone who is NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE THE AIRCRAFT have a say in how it's painted? It's just Trump sticking his nose in where he has no right to.
bricam
Brian Wilkes 10
A storm in a teacup!
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 3
I wonder how many actually remember the original paintjob of the aircraft that carried the President, starting with Eisenhower?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/41TpCNSVO7o/maxresdefault.jpg

Yeah, red and white.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41TpCNSVO7o
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
Nice find of SAM 970, VC-137A. This was actually the 3rd craft. The first craft to carry the "Air Force 1" callsign was named Columbine II..it was a silver Lockheed Constellation VC-121A..the second, Columbine III was a similar colour silver Lockheed Constellation, VC-121E
ddsteele
Dave Steele 1
http://www.air-and-space.com/20050926%20Pima%20Air%20Museum/DSC_0869%20VC-121A%2048-0614%20right%20front%20l.jpg
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 2
Sorry, day-glo orange.
PJSalazar
beautiful photos, thank you for sharing
lynx318
lynx318 1
both links are terminated
lynx318
lynx318 2
https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/executiveabroad/static/JFK_exiting_Air_Force_One.jpg
pilot1187
Bob LaCursia 4
Duncan, in two short sentences you've said it best! I completely agree with you and can add nothing.
n555cf
rbt schaffer 2
I think the current colors were picked to make the plane less visible while airborne. It is a beautiful color as is and if we paint it bright ORANGE it poses a more visible target.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 5
The current livery of Air Force 1 is iconic, recognized the world over. I had the pleasure of seeing it once, and it actually gave me goose bumps. It carries with it an aura of invincibility. Don't mess with a good thing.
jcjimtn
James Green 4
AF-1 is a Classic visual. I've been fortunate enough to have seen it several times at different airport around the world over the years. And, nothing bring greater pride of nationality than seeing that aircraft in another country, with its current paint job. That being, of course, the colors produced during the Kennedy administration...Thank you, Mrs. Kennedy. Nothing states the presence of the United States more that our Air Force One. There is no reason to change it. Other than....Trump wants him name associated with anything and everything he can get his hands on. Be it a Wall, a War, be it a military parade for himself, be it hijacking the 4th of July...for himself, be it turning AF-1 into a pseudo-military/looking aircraft to represent the United States [in a Trump way] Let us all do our best to STOP THIS ACT OF FOOLISHNESS!
lynx318
lynx318 0
Yes, don't mess with a classic!
ah6oy
Jim DeTour 7
Leave red white and blue to the Thunderbirds. Guy might be pushing the envelope on senility.
Smb37
Sh Bu -4
Unnecessarily snarky
ddsteele
Dave Steele -3
Pelosi is the bellwether in that field.
pavco
pavco 3
red white and blue , perfect , same flag . could congress possibly busy themselves doing
somthing more important. ie border, vets,,n etc.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 9
I guess the House has completed their work with the border crisis, military funding, proper treatment of veterans, trade with China, the dust up in Venezuela, vacations in Cuba, and all post offices have been given name.

Now they can move on to painting 747-200's operated by the Air Force.
bizprop
bizprop 11
Too busy with their endless investigations to deal with the real issues.
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 4
I wouldn't exactly call it an "issue" though.
siriusloon
siriusloon -3
Those issues include Trump's attempts at obstruction of justice, his corruption, his complete lack of knowledge of and respect for the Constitution and laws, etc, etc, etc.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

lynx318
lynx318 1
Polite heads up, emojis don't work here.
caverym
Avery Murray 0
I know. I thought that it'd add to the satire.
siriusloon
siriusloon 0
The issue of repainting Air Force One originated with Trump, so I guess he has taken care of all those things you listed, too.
ljcotnoir
Leo Cotnoir -5
The House is doing their job but Republicans in the Senator block everything.
FritzSteiner
Fritz Steiner 4
Really, LEO? Be specific and share with us what the House has passed that the Senate has blocked.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -2
Fritz, turn off right wing propaganda, get an education, become literate and READ the news.

Between 2009 and 2013, McConnell’s Senate Republicans blocked 79 Obama nominees. In the ENTIRE HISTORY of the United States until that point, only 68 presidential nominees had been blocked.

This year roughly 100 bills passed by the House of Representatives are awaiting Senate action.   McConnell treats anything and everything that comes from the House as a non-starter and refuses to allow a vote in the Senate on any bills.

Recently McConnell used his Republican majority to cut the time for debating Trump’s court appointees from 30 hours to two—thereby enabling Republicans to ram through even more Trump judges.

McConnell doesn’t give a fig about the Senate, or about democracy. He cares only about his partisan wins. 

America used to have a Senate. But under McConnell, what was once known as the world’s greatest deliberative body has become his partisan lap dog.  Every constitutional scholar has said that McConnell is single handedly destroying American democracy.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 0
Randy, those are Democratic talking points that omit certain important details. Pres. Obama nominees were not fit for duty by any means test. That is why they were blocked emasse.

The bills that are not being voted in the Senate did not receive measurable Republican support and are clearly crafted to push an agenda on America that the people do not want.

Debate time was cut because Senate Democrats used their time to belittle, harass, and hurl unfounded accusations at nominees, in wholly partisan fashion.

Sen. Schumer's opinion of Sen. McConnell is the most sour grapes from one who practiced his Senate leadership in the same fashion. You know nothing of Sen. McConnell's figs.

Every constitutional scholar? Balderdash. Labeled properly that should read "A few angry Democrats have said....
KineticRider
Randy Marco -3
No Ric, sorry but your just the typical brainwashed minion regurgitating the right wing lies as told to you by the usual vile cretins.

You also need an education and need to turn off right wing propaganda and read the FACTS!

There are Senate republicans that want bills brought to the floor and voted on that McConnell is blocking.
chop12345
chop12345 2
Whoa there big fella! I usually would not jump in a fight but you need a lesson.............."your" should be spelled "you are" or "you're." Careful who you are calling illiterate. Who needs an education? LMAO
KineticRider
Randy Marco -1
There is no lesson chop... except a lesson for you to use a little common sense. It's called auto spellchecker changing what you write when you make addendums before you post.
chop12345
chop12345 -1
If you had spelled it correctly "auto spellchecker" would not have changed it from you're to your! And I don't know what "auto spellchecker" means but auto spell check is three words not two. Lesson two is also free.................... Is English your primary language?
KineticRider
Randy Marco 1
Wrong again chop... you obviously know nothing about technology or much of anything else https://www.google.com/amp/s/techterms.com/amp/definition/spellcheck
FritzSteiner
Fritz Steiner 0
Thanks for the lecture on getting an education. I really appreciate it. All I have ia a BS from US Naval Academy and two years of masters' level post graduate education in Meteorology and Oceanography. I've been reading since I was 4 and have been literate about the same lenghth of time..

What's your alma mater (if you have one)?

Btw, do you remember who McConnell's predecessor was? Let me help you out. His name was HARRY REID . He was a greater obstruction to legislative progress in the Senate than the Hoover Dam is to the Colorado River.

To stay on topic, I think it would be appropriate to change the livery of the new 747's that will come on line AFTER Presidient Trump has left office in 2025. IYou didn't express you opinion, but I suspect you're against it -- only because President Trump has suggested it. You hate him so much that you can hardly contain yourself.
lynx318
lynx318 0
While your at it, paint the Washington monument in barber pole red, white and blue stripes. Why ruin a tradition that is instantly recognisable with gaudiness. It's a flying landmark...err airmark.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -2
You're so hopelessly obtuse, you aren't even cognizant that YOU made my point inordinately clear for me... that you can't fix ignorance and illiteracy, to wit Nazi Germany.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
Nothing to do with painting the "200's" Its the paint scheme for the new "800's" Already decided the 200's will remain as they are. It's being questioned by the same person who questioned the price of the new units before steering them to the 2 already built.
What I question, in trying to save US taxpayer dollars, is why no tender bids were put out for the conversion? And why are they building new hanger facility? Would it not be cheaper to renovate the old?
feote
Ken Jackson 3
When has Trump ever been interested in saving taxpayer dollars? His whole MO has been gaming the system since 1980. He has been successful at that!
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
It should not be up to Trump, it should be up to the DoD. The aircraft isn't slated to fly till after he is out of office. Remember those replacements were already in the works before he came on board.
It should also be up to the people of the US to elect it's new colours or stay with the present. It does represent them on the world's stage.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke -2
JFK's wife picked the current paint job. Nothing wromg with that or the current paint.

There comes a time when a change should be made. The president is the boss, it is his call.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
JFK picked the current paint scheme on a jet he would have be flying in for a while, the Boeing 707's SAM 26000 and SAM 27000. They entered service in 1962, after he was elected. G.H. Bush could have had the current 747's, SAM 28000 and SAM 29000 painted to his decision, because they did not enter service until just after his presidential win in 1989, but liked the scheme the way it was. This jet will not be into service till late 2024, and now perhaps 2025. Trump will not be in office then, so again I say it should be up to the DoD and the people of the US, OR the newly elected official at that time. Aircraft paint is the last thing done.
Terria1
Terri Santo -3
I suppose Trump has the time to focus on his paint preference.
SpaceRanger
Michael McMurtrey 4
Granted, this is an aviation site and not a railfan site, but I find it more than somewhat hypocritical that those who are in favor of a change to the current Air Force One color scheme have expressed no objection to its use on the locomotive that pulled George H. W. Bush's funeral train. Same colors, same basic design!
icohen01
Ian Cohen 3
Was the train that was used a government owned train expressly for transporting the POTUS? I’m betting not.
lynx318
lynx318 0
I don't think that comparison has the same target value.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
Odd we get down voted for mentioning the G.H. Bush locomotive was painted to mimic the current Air Force 1, which was not/is not getting a re-paint. Nothing hypocritical at all of conversing about changing up the colour on the new birds, since most of the colours on the present AF 1/SAM 28000 SAM 29000, have been used a long long time.
lynx318
lynx318 3
Downvotes are gonna happen when the post is more political than aeronautical. Can't be helped.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
I know..poltical because people drove it that way, myself included. That's why I had some of my posts deleted.
He will NOT be in office when those craft are ready to fly! Even re-elected in, the 8 year tenure will be up! How the hell did this post go so far off the rails? This is not political at all..plain and simple "you wont be here so you should have no say"
Bernie20910
Bernie20910 -1
So, your plan is that only the sitting president should have any "say" in the color scheme (plus Congress)?
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
NO..the people should have the say. It's a representation around the world, of ALL the people of the US, Republican, Democrat, Independants. It should not be political at all!
But if you want to go there, Eisenhower had no advice/say for the paint scheme of SAM 26000, Nixon no advice/say of SAM 27000, just like Reagan had no advice/say on SAM 28000 or SAM 29000.
Bernie20910
Bernie20910 0
Good luck getting any kind of general consensus from "the people" on this. Most can't even decide what color will look best in the bathroom.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
This isn't about the current AirForce 1, this is about the future AirForce 1. If there was a future funeral train, then perhaps it would come into play then.
LethalThreat
LethalThreat 5
I think it is time to delete this Squawk FlightAware mods. This is going way off topic rapidly and turning into some political forum.
PegLegJim
Jim Welch 5
With all due respect, this entire article is about the political reasons to re-scheme AF-1.
How can you expect a political issue to NOT have political responses?!?
We’re not looking for a discussion about the Rockwell Hardness of it’s new paint.
I get it.
Some Skwauk discussions do auger in like a bad wreck, but this one is different.
It’s 110% political from top to bottom.
LethalThreat
LethalThreat 2
You are right. Any topic centered around the president is bound to start this kind of thing. This comment section is just starting to get a little bit too far out though.
Smb37
Sh Bu -1
Totally agree.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve -1
There is NO political reasons! HE will not be in office when those birds are set to fly around 2025, so he should have NO say on what they look like on the outside. How hard is that to get through to people?? The very last thing to be done to them is exterior paint!
shenghaohan
Shenghao Han 2
No red unless it is something like accent color, other wise too stands out in and airport, easy target... (not many airline incorporated a lot of red on the fuselage... I can only think of a hand of Chinese airlines used large portions of red...)

The current livery isn’t “stealthy” either but people got so used to it I felt paint it anything else won’t top over it... just like sequels are never as good as the original... and after some 50 years of that iconic livery people will definitely miss it.

Why not just let air force paint it... they probably will paint it in bomber grey? Or use the magical B-2 reader absorbent paint? Or even just plain white with blue arrow fin accent won’t look that bad...
gregmermel
Greg Mermel 2
I'm thinking he'll want to use red for a drogue chute cut to look like an oversize necktie.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 0
Take a look at Norwegian. Plenty of red for everyone.
nasdisco
Chris B 2
Let the next President decide.
crkdoug
douglas slotolowicz 0
No way a draft dodger and unindicted coconspirator should have any say in what color a military plane gets painted, his red white & blue would no doubt get turned into gaudy Saudi Arabian gold with some obscene version of his fascist name on it. Let Corporal Bone Spurs paint his own aircraft.
feote
Ken Jackson 7
He did paint his own aircraft. Trump Shuttle blue. It went bankrupt.
lynx318
lynx318 0
Trump Force One, his personal 757 is just in maintained mothballs. When his presidency ends, he will be using it again. Why fly your own when you're provided a company vehicle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Force_One
Bobqat
Bob Harrington 2
Acksirley, N757AF flies fairly regularly on Trump bidnizz. Factoid: before Trump, 757AF was owned by Paul Allen, of Microsoft and other fame. Used to see it in and out of BFI...
lynx318
lynx318 0
I don't think it's moved from La Guardia since that Global Express Bombardier wing clip incident in Nov 2018
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
It actually has quite a number of flights since then. That and apparently it no longer resides at La Guardia but now at Stewart.
lynx318
lynx318 0
Huh, there ya go, I guess for his family, can't see Don, as president, using it personally still or the security would be a shocker. But I'm just speculating.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
Trump execs and son's who are running the co.
Smb37
Sh Bu -4
Unnecessarily snarky and inappropriate for this venue.
feote
Ken Jackson 0
Excuse me? Are we talking about something other than painting AF1? The facts is, Trump bankrupted his airline, Trump Shuttle, and I am not willing to grant him the right to inflict his personal taste on the aircraft which symbolizes the the might of our nation.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
No offense intended, Ken, but I don't think you have the power to grant or to not grant him the right. (smile)
lynx318
lynx318 0
Trump Shuttle came close to bankruptcy but instead was merged into another company back in 92', his current private 757-200 he only bought in 2011 which I believe is what Douglas Slotolowicz (above) was speaking about.
PegLegJim
Jim Welch 0
Every time I see a Soldier forced to salute tRump, I get sick to my stomach.
Now he says he “would have been honored to have served on D-Day.”
The only fools that believe THAT, believe the Earth is flat!
Hulananni
Judy Guffey 4
Well said.
benthurston
Ben Thurston 2
The only thing sicker than soldiers being forced to salute Trump is the video of Trump saluting an North Korean general!

FritzSteiner
Fritz Steiner 0
Jim: Did you get your panties in an uproar when Joe Biden got saluted when he Vice-president? Biden had a lot of draft deferments, too -- as did Bill Clinton, the quintessential Draft Dodger.

BTW, no member of our armed forces is "Forced" to salute his or her Commander-in-Chief. He was elected fair and aware and he's the President. Get over it
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
You obviously know little of the forces. "It is a requirement that all enlisted, NCO, senior NCO, CO etc salute the Commander-in-chief UNLESS they are in Navy and uncovered (not in uniform) Then they must snap-to-attention." I am unsure of Army, Airforce or Marines code of conduct when they are uncovered, but I believe it the same.
It is up to the forces member, when covered, whether or not they stand in salute or salute the vice president. The rule of thumb is "when in doubt, whip it out." And if this discussion had happened during those times of Biden, Clinton, etc, who knows what would have been said.
FritzSteiner
Fritz Steiner -1
You obviously have little knowledge of me, rapidwolve.

I spent 25 years in the United States Navy, ace -- 20 of them as a commissioned officer.

I served in three diesel-electric submarines (two of 'em as Engineer Officer) where I , spent a year as N3 for the River Patrol Force (CTF 116) in the Mekong Delta -- an outfit heavy in combat, participated in the Apollo 13 recovery, and had a highly successful command. So I don't think any lectures from you about "the forces" are necessary.

There's a difference between being "forced" to salute the President and being told in boot camp that "it's a requirement ...", since at that time in their service careers they also have to be told that a myriad of things they didn't used to do that became requirements. From then on they do it instinctively.

So, Jim -- when is the last time that YOU saw a soldier being "forced" to salute the President? I suspect NEVER.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
Who the H is Jim? Sounds like you obviously have little knowledge of me, Fritz!

When the forces state "it is a requirement" IT IS REQUIRED. Just like saluting an officer is "forced" into our skulls. Many times there were officers I would rather "knock out", but my brain "forced" me to salute. And I know many times, others wanted to clock officers, but were "forced" to salute. Not doing so, in either case, had consequences, and they were not good. It needed no CO standing behind kicking in the arse to "force" it as it is already inscribed in the brains. Same as other "requirements" Many soldiers are "forced" to salute a President, ant President, they may very well dislike. But it is "stomached" and done!

Just because you were in the forces, don't think "lectures" from time to time aren't necessary, ace! They are. I have had many given to me. Seem to think because of what you did and action you saw, it entitles you to be omitted. It doesn't! Just like many of the rest who saw "action"!
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
* any not ant
KineticRider
Randy Marco 2
Fritz, you have serious challenges with facts and reality, clearly there ARE very REAL consequences for not saluting a superior officer; if that superior officer wants to make your life unpleasant or in the extreme, end your career, they can make either of those a reality.

Given your statements, you know the foregoing is absolutely true, but for being a sycophant and your obsequiousness toward trumpf, you deny it's true.

As to Biden and Clinton, they don't have cerebral maladies.  They didn't say they "WISH they had been able to serve their country" like Cadet Bone Spurs said on the 75th anniversary of D-Day, when he's on record as saying "You think I'm STUPID, I wasn't going to Vietnam!".

So I wonder... do you feel "stupid" for being involved in Vietnam, yet you are a trumpfer... you don't seem like a guy that considers himself stupid? 

Per your insecure and self proclaimed assertions of higher education, your statements and actions are extremely dichotomous; which certainly don’t validate your claimed intellect. I don't need to gasconade my academic achievements, my critical thinking is demonstrative in itself.   Further, Biden's son served, trumpf's sons not only didn't serve, they wouldn't even consider it as they aren't "stupid".

It is ABUNDANTLY clear to all RATIONAL, intelligent people that trumpf is a extremely unstable, narcissistic, wannabe Dictator as evidenced JUST BY his insane, immature tweets about anyone that doesn't heap incessant adulation upon him....  

Not to mention his 10,800 lies in just the last 870 days.

Anyone that salutes Cadet Bone Spurs should get a Commendation Medal for meritorious service under duress.
Smb37
Sh Bu -4
Inappropriate venue and unnecessarily snarky
kerimparrot
Mike Williams 1
Sky blue pink with purple polka dots is the best combination for everything.
garritt
garritt 1
plaid would be nice...
ljcotnoir
Leo Cotnoir 1
I think Jet Blue has that locked up.
Bobqat
Bob Harrington 1
lynx318
lynx318 1
...because the plane is capable of 'LUDICROUS SPEED'
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 1
Oh, for those who have not seen his proposed paint job, this is it.

https://c-3sux78kvnkay76x24osm-y-syt-iusx2egqgsgofkjx2etkz.g01.msn.com/g00/3_c-3ccc.syt.ius_/c-3SUXKVNKAY76x24nzzvyx3ax2fx2fosm-y-syt-ius.gqgsgofkj.tkzx2fzktgtzx2fgsvx2fktzozeojx2fGGJh4U1.osmx3fnx3d296x26cx3d7775x26sx3d2x26wx3d26x26ux3dlx26rx3dlx26o76i.sgx78qx3dosgmk_$/$/$/$/$
Bobqat
Bob Harrington 0
Essentially, a boring copy of CanForce One... meh.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/collingwoodbarry/19286214272

Let's stick with the current scheme.
augerin
Dave Mathes 1
...once again, a legit topic spins right down the toilet........
TWA55
TWA55 1
It looks nice, but for me, I have never really liked it. Maybe some variation of the current colors.
wakechaserphoto
mike prendergast 1
I,m an Aussie and i sure would'nt change it.The minorities over here are trying to change everything!!
serdyfsx12
JOE SERDYNSKI -1
Trump = Gaudy
Flightdog
Roger Curtiss 1
One does shudder to think what paint scheme this president would think to slap on the plane. And how do you paint a wall on an airplane anyway>
mgower
Michael Gower -1
President Trump's desired paint scheme has already been published and it is very nice.
lynx318
lynx318 1
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-trump-unveils-patriotic-paint-job-air-force/story?id=63676678&cid=social_twitter_abcn
lynx318
lynx318 1
Oops sorry picture only without the other guff.
https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/trump_af1_embed_hpEmbed_16x9_992.jpg
21voyageur
Dan Chiasson -7
This turd of a president just wants to leave footprints for the next generation. Unparalleled ego and nothing else. Can not even negotiate himself out of a paper bag. Suspect he will be long gone by the time they get to painting the jets.
kjjmac
Karen McCullough 0
More bitter liberals.
kjjmac
Karen McCullough 9
I'm guessing if a Democratic President wanted to change it, it would be a non-issue.
crawleyjoel
Joel Crawley 3
Republicans lost their minds when Obama wore a tan suit.
MIKESWICK
MIKE SWICK 2
Not a liberal or conservative issue it's about a person who is unfit for office
crosbya
Al Crosby -6
I guess Trump can't deal with big problems, so he creates little ones that he can handle.
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 6
Don't start that argument. Please.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

PJSalazar
May I point out that if the iconic indeed Loewy design suited the ego of JFK and fashion-aware Jackie, then a precedent was set. To each prez his ego, and design ? Personally, as Air Force One is an AF plane, her livery should be that of the AF with simply the coat of arms of the presidency on the fuselage. Keep it simple.
yr2012
matt jensen 8
And keep it grey
PJSalazar
Philippe-Joseph Salazar -2
I agree. But if one is looking at a great, unique design, both bold in today's terms and historic per se, why not bright yellow with a green snake and Don't Tread On Me on the fuselage: after all that was the original American Revolution's flag that led to Independence and was carried by the People. Imagine that plane on a tarmac! Zillions pics on social network right away.
VMGR352
Robert Jennings 1
"coat of arms" hmmmmm ;-)
bizprop
bizprop -4
Wouldn’t want our VIP aircraft to look patriotic and represent the colors of our flag! Unfortunately we have some in Congress who not only hate our flag, but also hate our country. They are the people who want to ride rough shot over our Constitution and Laws with their endless political investigations and vendettas.
siriusloon
siriusloon 0
When the engines shut down, you're supposed to stop whining, too.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Terria1
Terri Santo -3
Intolerant of Nazis, mocking the disabled, separating families, destroying the environment. Are you ok with these things?
LethalThreat
LethalThreat 1
Cut it out guys and let’s not escalate this any further.
GaryFriar
Gary Friar 1
Perfect the way it is are 747's not near the end of their life span?
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
It's the paint scheme for the new 800's..they will shortly begin a new lifespan.
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 1
Not that one for sure.
PJSalazar
What do you imply? It will launch in 2024 at the earliest.
cppifa
cppifa 1
And there are those that are unfit to post their tripe. Leave the political BS back in the kindergarten class where it belongs; and remember to wipe.

Do any of the whiners realize that radar is colorblind? I suspect not.
ljcotnoir
Leo Cotnoir -6
That does not alter the fact that Trump is no-class loser.
lynx318
lynx318 0
Do we know what technology is on the AF1's? I don't, but radar suppression devices are possible, thus a need for visual targeting by enemy, why make it easier.
Bernie20910
Bernie20910 1
Paint it like a bald eagle.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
See what I mean? You had an idea and put it out there. Others in here have had ideas and put it out there, although some were wayy out there. We cannot go back in the past and change how those birds were painted, but it can be done in the future.
THAT is why I stated down below, and replied to you, it should not be political. Trump is having his say for the inside, Congress votes on how much to approve for painting, NOW you the people decide what the outside looks like!
PJSalazar
Philippe-Joseph Salazar -1
How the 'People decide is a moot point. The 'People' have decided once by electing Trump for 4 years, and once by sending in a democratic majority in the House for 2 years, and confirming a Republican majority in the Senate. Now who represents the 'People' in the matter of The Paint Job? Perhaps the Senate, as the Senate has overview on foreign policy and the presidential plane is very much an iconic instrument for diplomatic display. But the 'People' do not exist in reality. It is a legal fiction. So perhaps back to the fact it is an Air Force plane, hence grey. Grey is chic anyway. And ominous.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
Why is it a moot point? Again you strive for the political agenda. If the "people" did not exist, who was it who elected in the representatives, the very same representatives that should listen to them, and not go running off on their own agenda? It is not legal fiction, it is the way things have "progressed" over decades, hell centuries even, and maybe it is time for change. Even the US Constitution states "We The People", which is every citizen of the US. So why not vote on the colour? See...you want it grey.
PJSalazar
In law a moot point is a debatable issue. I am not politicizing the debate, I am just pick up on your own post where you mention "the people" and am merely pointing out that, since the 18th Century, the question of what 'the people' mean has been at the core of debates about representative democracy. If the US were a direct democracy, without layers of representatives, the people indeed (or at least the electors) would say directly what they want as a Paint Job. However in little more than two years 'the People' have first elected a Republican president, then a Democrat House. So it is unclear to me what 'the People' actually want, as what they do, as citizens, is to delegate sovereignty to representatives, and thus abandon most of their freedom to choose precisely - representatives who, in turn may or may not decide about the Paint Job. Not that I would trust the good taste of many of them, on both sides of the aisle, or sitting on the fence.
lynx318
lynx318 2
As a Non-American, this debate is pointless and shows Trump's intentions, distraction and dilution of other more important matters. He introduces this dopey idea that will have no effect in his time in office but will tarnish the next president. Doubtful the colour scheme will change, there will be very few that will want to break a strong, world accepted tradition.
PJSalazar
Philippe-Joseph Salazar -2
I venture to say that when a State public image is at stake, and that image is part of strategic communications, it cannot be pointless, but quite the opposite. Planes such as AF-1 usually carry aloft images of power - they are 'air power' under another form. Am sure for JFK, savvy as he was at publicity, and for Trump who knows the power of advertising, that lesson is well understood. Aviation is power.
lynx318
lynx318 2
AF-1 designated planes already carry a great image of power, it doesn't need a ditzy Vegas strip showgirl or 80's reject glamrocker paint job. This is just an attempt to ruin that well established image with unnecessary pomp and glitter. US government doesn't need advertising, who in the world hasn't heard of the US?
PJSalazar
It is about advertising US power from the air, not just the US - two different issues.
lynx318
lynx318 0
In the air.....To who?
PJSalazar
Are you being facetious? Let's say: to those who look up.
lynx318
lynx318 2
Appropriate humour actually. Low aircraft, too fast to see colour scheme and high aircraft you won't pick out the colours with naked eye. You've missed my point, U.S. does not need PT Barnum advertising.
s0uthsider
Thomas Agrednerp 0
No vote by Congress until a special investigation committee determines the level of Putin's involvement in this tawdry scheme.
Smb37
Sh Bu 0
Unnecessarily snarky and ridiculously inappropriate
VMGR352
Robert Jennings 1
Trailing lynx318's sage comment; at the end of the day, AF1 is the taxpayer's bird. When/if ever this (primarily) command and control aircraft actually needs repainting, DoD and the GAO will crunch the numbers, and the XXth Congress will rubber stamp whatever livery scheme is pronounced appropriate for the time.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 3
You don't know until you see it Alan.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

ToddBaldwin3
ToddBaldwin3 18
This is an aviation site, not a political forum, we'd like to keep it that way.
coastalrap
Rich Pasco -3
Agreed! However we can always count on the intolerant hateful democrats to never miss an opportunity to drag any site down.
ToddBaldwin3
ToddBaldwin3 3
It seems to me that there are hateful and intolerant people on both sides of the political fence. There are also reasonable and tolerant people on both sides.

[This comment was deleted.]

coastalrap
Rich Pasco -2
If “we’ll enough alone” means to allow the hateful intolerant democrats to continue to spew their crap, then no. I understand that they would much rather left without confrontation, it’s easier to push their socialist agenda.

I didn’t bring politics into this forum.
benthurston
Ben Thurston 2
Yeah, we are a bit intolerant; but I'm not sure that being tolerant of Nazis and fascists is anything for republicans to brag about.

[This comment was deleted.]

coastalrap
Rich Pasco -1
I notice you don’t have the same interest in anti trump posts, I get where you’re coming from.

[This comment was deleted.]

coastalrap
Rich Pasco 0
Yep, you only seem to have interest in post that don’t agree with your way of thinking, at least that’s what you’ve shown. You can continue to fool yourself but you’re transparent enough for everyone else.

Remember, I didn’t start the politics, and you only chose my post in support of Trump to single out. So please leave it alone!! Get back to what you know best, aviation.
siriusloon
siriusloon -1
Because politics never, ever has anything to do with aviation, right?
sgbelverta
sharon bias 1
Aviation and politics sort of get balled up when one is discussing AF1. That plane is a visual statement about the US, to our citizens, and citizens around the world. I just don't want one man, or one organization, decide how we are represented.
MIKESWICK
MIKE SWICK -1
Who is we?
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte -2
That goes for you too Mike. Keep your snarky comments to yourself.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

kevinkeswick
Kevin Keswick 0
It would be a big mistake to change AF1's livery. You cannot improve on perfection and in my eyes the AF1 livery is perfection. The design was done by the renowned industrial designer Raymond Lowey under the supervision of Jackie Kennedy who had impeccable taste. Trump has no taste - just look at his garish NYC penthouse which looks like a cheap bordello. He is a vulgar man who wants to put his vulgar stamp on everything.
kevinkeswick
Kevin Keswick 0
Correction: Raymond Loewy https://www.raymondloewy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Air-Force-One-4-with-RL.jpg
PeteNguyen
Peter Nguyen 0
How about an orange livery for AF1? Matches its main occupant.
lynx318
lynx318 -1
Protestant Irish would love that, just for the heck of it, google image searched orange jumbos.....CRINGE!
Bobqat
Bob Harrington 3
Don't put the badmouth on Braniff!
kehoedoug1
Douglas Kehoe -5
I suppose it'll be black red white, like Trump's failed airline...or like the colors of a swastika... expect no less from a fascist.
ljcotnoir
Leo Cotnoir -1
Doesn't everyone want to see AF One painted gold with "TRUMP" emblazoned on it?
feote
Ken Jackson 4
He did that with his failed airline. Would you like some Trump wine with your Trump steak?
LethalThreat
LethalThreat 2
Haha anything’s possible!
stratofan
stratofan -2
Let me state for the record that I feel the Loewy scheme is iconic as well as great. That being said, I do feel that any proposed change should be carefully considered. However San Fran Nan, just wants to stick her nose into anything while she can. I do not think she would have been as much of a gadfly toward the Kennedys had she been in the same spot then. No paint scheme has come close to being as garish as the 'Independence' when Truman was in office! I would also suggest a look at the colors on the E-4 aircraft. Simple, and yet bold.
PJSalazar
I feel bad as a non-US citizen to comment on this, after having posted it quite innocently, but I do feel that personalized planes, in a democracy, are monarchical: there is no reason why any president or PM, in a democracy, should have a "royal coach". If the presidential plane, or prime ministerial one, is flown by a national air force, use then the air force livery, and stick io the plane whatever official seal you want. By contrast the pope flies Alitalia, with two little flags stuck near the cockpit: only marker "vuelo papale" is the call sign. If that is good for the Vicar of Christ on Earth (and in the air), then it shoudd be enough for any elected president in a civilized country.
ljcotnoir
Leo Cotnoir 2
Perhaps you have forgotten that the House of Representatives is charged by the Constitution with the responsibility of allocating the taxpayers' money. They have every right to have a say in this. Your belittling the nation's top representative as "San Fran Nan" just makes you look as foolish as your tweeting führer.
Bobqat
Bob Harrington 2
Ironic comment, no?
normancjr
Norman Allan 0
who is the better designer, raymond loewy or the tangerine buffoon?

"Air Force One's livery was redesigned by Loewy in 1962 using slate and cyan blues. The presidential seal was added to both sides of the fuselage near the nose, a large American flag was painted on the tail and the sides of the aircraft read "United States of America" in all capital letters. Loewy's work won immediate praise from the president and the press. Variations on Loewy's original design are today flown by most of the US Air Force's fleet of VIP aircraft
Photograph: Bill Eppridge/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Image" = http://bit.ly/2Lujso5
garritt
garritt 0
donfritz56
Don Fritz 0
It doesn't say he wants to change it. It says they want to say whether he can or not. More BS politics. This should be for aviation
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
Last year, Trump told CBS News "that he wants to paint the new planes red, white and blue, which I think is appropriate.”
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 0
Why would you need to know that unless you planned to paint it?
DMADIGAN
DANIEL MADIGAN -2
How about painting it deep delusional blue........
Smb37
Sh Bu -1
Unnecessary snarkyness
GaryFriar
Gary Friar -5
fake news

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

ljcotnoir
Leo Cotnoir 2
Real Americans want to minimize the damage Trump is doing to the country.
KineticRider
Randy Marco 2
Real Americans don't support a traitor, conman and pathological liar!
FritzSteiner
Fritz Steiner -1
Randy: The more you comment the crazier your seem.

Be specific -- name the treasonous acts President Trump has committed.

Can you identify a justfew of the criminal acts that Hillary Clinton committed while she was Secretary of State? Of course you can't because you're illiterate when it comes to facts.
lynx318
lynx318 4
Certainly a pathological liar...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/04/president-trump-has-made-false-or-misleading-claims-over-days/?utm_term=.1e1927c70cb1
KineticRider
Randy Marco 0
For specificity, IF you would have read the Mueller report, you would know the treasonous acts. 

There have been indictments against 34 individuals and 3 entities on nearly 200 separate criminal charges.

Five Trump associates have been convicted, including Trump’s Campaign Chairman, former National Security Adviser, numerous other trumpf former Advisors and another, Roger Stone, is awaiting trial. His former Lawyer, 13 Russians and 3 Russian entities conspired to defraud the United States and interfere with the 2016 presidential election to get trumpf elected.

In addition, add trumps tax fraud, money laundering, countless acts of other frauds including trumpf university, investor fraud, draft fraud... it's endless.

Yes Fritz, you would have excelled mightily in the Nazi regime, as your ilk are easily duped and exploited!

Name ONE crime Hillary has been indicted on... you can't because there are NONE.
FritzSteiner
Fritz Steiner -1
Randy, you reading comprehension is poor. I wrote:

"Be specific -- name the treasonous acts President Trump has committed."

Didn't that mean I wanted you -- it was YOU who has alleged President Trump is a traitor - to name the treasonous acts, not refer me to a document and have me search for it myself?

NAME ONE!!

Put up or shut up!!

Only a real jerk --and an internet coward -- would make the scurrilous suggestion that I would have excelled mightily in the Nazi regime. I RESENT IT! I spent a significant part of my life honorably and proudly in the serrvice of my country, the USA.

Hillary Clinton has not been indicted YET of the numerous crimes tha she committed as Secretary of State
James Comey, after detailing her multiple crimes following the FBI 's non-investigation, said he wouldn't indict her -- which was NOT his responsibility. So Loretta Lynch, who held a clandestine tarmac meeting in Phoenix with another crook, Bill Clinton, deferred to Comey's opinion. and Hillary wasn't indicted

She's NOT off the hook, Randy. Hillary, Comey, McCabe, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, and James Baker ... et al ... are going to be indicted, tried, and convicted.

I still think that the president, any presiden, should be able to suggest that a new paint scheme for AirForce ONE. The plane's color scheme is secondary to the words: "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" emblazoned the fuselage.

I'm done with you, Randy.
feote
Ken Jackson -4
King Donald speaks! All hail King Donald!
KineticRider
Randy Marco -3
Exactly Ken, further if you support trumpf YOU are complicit in enabling a traitor!
feote
Ken Jackson 0
Hardly support the Con in Chief, dude.
KineticRider
Randy Marco 1
Ken you mistook my post, it wasn't meant that you support trumpf, I agreed with your post.

I was generically stating that if you (as in others) support trumpf they are complicit in enabling a traitor!
Trumpeter
Peter Hansen 0
It should always be painted with the color of the hair of the sitting POTUS...

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

bizprop
bizprop 9
There are a lot of countries flags that are red, white and blue including the UK and France
siriusloon
siriusloon 4
Canada's former prime minister, who was finally kicked out of office after far too long, forced the RCAF to repaint it's VIP-capable aircraft in the colours of his political party, with blue being the main colour, even though the Canadian flag has exactly zero blue in it. This is why such decisions should not be made by one person but rather by consensus, such as an elected body.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
I agree with wayy too much blue, yet the old bird did need a new look. If they wanted to pay homage to the RCAF, should have followed the Snowbirds theme, along with the Maple leaf in the blue circle.
w7psk
Ricky Scott 13
Really
One gentleman posts a twitter opinion on what "he thinks" the president wants and you post it as Gospel?
richardorgill
Richard Orgill 6
The press for you
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 1
Hey, change once every half a century is good! I think after 50 years it actually might need "fixing" for a change
JKMSEM
John Middaugh 1
How about LGBTQ+ COLORS?
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 2
tmpanther
Thomas Panther -1
Good point made by others - let Congress study the issue - nothing will ever happen just like their current legislative record.
curtbetzold
curt Betzold -1
The WH has zero business designing a paint scheme, this is not a corporate aircraft, its MY aircraft and you work for me TRUMP.
ddsteele
Dave Steele 1
Imagine if Jackie Kennedy had been told this.

The iconic paint scheme we know today would not exist.
ronbaird1942
ron baird -3
I can only image it with a portrait of the President all over the fuselage!
JKMSEM
John Middaugh -4
Don't hold your breath!

تسجيل الدخول

ليس لديك حساب؟ سجل الآن (مجانا) لتستمع بمميزات مخصصة، وتنبيهات الرحلات، وغير ذلك الكثير!