http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...9aee279119c.71
I always thought the first lady's plane was Air Force 2F, but I heard some ATC tapes on ABC News and it now flies as Executive 1F.
Printable View
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...9aee279119c.71
I always thought the first lady's plane was Air Force 2F, but I heard some ATC tapes on ABC News and it now flies as Executive 1F.
Chris, that has always been the call sign for the First Family when they fly without the President. "Executive One" is used if POTUS flies on a civilian aircraft. VPOTUS uses "AF2" when on a military aircraft, "Exec 2" on a civilian aircraft, and his family flying alone would be "E2F".
I thought "2" was for Vice President, and that the family members had other callsigns.
Airfoce 1 is President on an Airforce aircraft
Navy 1 is President on a Navy aircraft
Executive 1 is when he takes a Cessna 172 up for a spin, or a private gulfstream...etc
Airforce 1F is the First Lady with other family member without the president
Airforce 2 is Vice President
Airforce 2F is the family of the VP when the VP is not on the aircraft
This is how I understand it
I have two questions about the news coverage of this "event":
1. If it happened at Andrews AIR FORCE BASE, why would the FAA be investigating?
2. Am I the only one who thinks this is totally a NON- news story?
I have to say that I agree with question #2. If this had been just a regular everyday civilian airline flight, this never would have made the news. So, why does the fact that it was the First Lady make a difference. Nobody was hurt, there was no crash, it wasn't even a near miss. The First Lady's plane was just simply 2 miles too close to the cargo plane that was landing in front of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JHNA57
If the First Lady had not been on that flight, and the ATC across the country was not under the microscope right now, nobody would have ever heard about this. This is just another case of the media having to stick its nose where it doesn't need to be and blow something that is nothing way out of proportion.
Just my two cents.
OK, there seems to be some confusion here...
When the President is flying on an Air Force aircraft (VC-25, C-32, T-38, etc.) it is Air Force 1. If he is on a Navy aircraft, it is Navy 1. It works the same way for Army, Marine (like the helicopters from HMX-1) or Coast Guard. If the President is on a civilian aircraft, it is Executive 1.
If the Vice President is on an Air Force aircraft, it is Air Force 2. The call signs work the same with other branches of the service as well. If he is on a civilian aircraft, it is Executive 2.
If a member of the First Family (First Lady, children of the President) are on board any aircraft, without the POTUS or VPOTUS, it is Executive 1 Foxtrot (Foxtrot being the international phonetic alphabet word for the letter "F"). If a member of the Vice President's family is on board any aircraft, without the POTUS or VPOTUS, it is Executive 2 Foxtrot.
For aircraft of the 89th Airlift Wing, which provide service for the President and other government officals (VC-25, C-32, C-40, etc.) if they are operating without one of the above named individuals/groups, they will use a call sign based on their unit - Special Air Mission- plus the tail number of the aircraft. Hence, when the VC-25 is on a training flight, or they have dropped POTUS at JFK and are repositioning to SWF, they will use the call sign SAM 28000 or SAM 29000, depending on which aircraft they are using (82-8000 or 92-9000). An interesting bit of trivia - when Richard Nixon resigned in 1974, he was still President when he departed Washington, so the VC-137 he flew on used the Air Force 1 call sign for the first part of the flight. At the time Gerald Ford was sworn in as President, the flight crew contacted ATC and requested their call sign be changed from Air Force 1 to SAM 26000.
1 - From what I've read, it was an issue with the civilian approach/en-route controller who had them too close, then gave incorrect information to tower when he handed them off.Quote:
Originally Posted by JHNA57
2 - It involved the wives of POTUS and VPOTUS so it is going to get more scrutiny, especially with everything else going on involving ATC.
Thanks for the clarification Moose!
According to CNN:
So I guess it was this:Quote:
Obama's plane, known as a C-40, was part of the Air National Guard, not the regular Air Force fleet used by VIPs at Andrews
http://www.113wg.ang.af.mil/shared/m...080725-005.jpg
That answers why they used the Executive callsign.
No, they used the Executive call sign because the First Lady was on it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris102
Very slight correction here, possibly bordering on pedantry. Training missions for the 89th use the callsign VENUS, with a fixed callsign for each aircraft. Non V/POTUS mission flights for the 89th use SAM. Aircraft from the 201st (DC ANG), which is what was involved in this non-story, use BOXER. I've heard EXECUTIVE 1 FOXTROT many times, but never EXECUTIVE 2 FOXTROT. It wouldn't surprise me if the Secret Service let the Second Lady fly commercial, and if she was on a military jet, they'd just used the standard SAM/BOXER/AVALON nomenclature.Quote:
Originally Posted by moose135
I think this whole thing is a non-story also...blown out of proportion to get some headlines. Go arounds happen ALL the time ......
New rules in place for VPOTUS or FLOTUS flights...
From the LA Times:
And Mateo, you are correct, it is only operational missions that use the SAM call sign. I've also heard that they have used the SAM call sign rather than "Air Force 2" occasionally when flying in "sensitive" parts of the world, and didn't want to advertise the passenger list...Quote:
...Separately, the FAA said aircraft carrying the first lady or vice president would receive a higher level of scrutiny from controllers since the aborted landing of a plane carrying Michelle Obama this week. From now on, flights carrying Mrs. Obama or Vice President Joe Biden will be handled by an air traffic supervisor rather than a controller, the agency said in a statement. The new rules apply to approaches and departures handled by a regional air traffic facility in Warrenton, Va., and takeoffs and landings at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, where the presidential fleet is based. Flights with the president aboard already must be handled by a supervisor.
I am suprised it resulted in a go around at all... The performance specs for both airplanes speak to the fact that the C17 could have easily gotten down and off in enough time with 3.08 miles sep. that by the time the C40 crossed the numbers the C17 would be clear of the hold short. Not to mention you can ref a 737-700 down at like 115. Airlines actually pay for approval to adjust the ref speeds to higher in their books so that they can match spacing... If you look at the factory numbers for the 737NG 700 model and than compare them to the 121 book there is an average difference of between 20 and 30 knots in there... I know at Continental they use artifically high ref speeds on the weight tablets so that they can fit the spacing at places like EWR on the 700. When the NG's first came to their fleet I read an article that touched heavily on the higher ref speeds in the 800/900 and how they had to adjust the books on the rest of the fleet because the 800 and 900 were reffing around 140 to 160 while 300's, 500's and 700's were crawling through the pattern as slow as 120 range.
Well this may not have been much of a news story as far as anyone here is concerned, but the conversation about the callsigns has been fascinating. Not to kiss anyone's ass because that ain't my style, but once again I have furthered my aviation knowledge base because of the expertise of you all on this forum.
Hooray for the interwebs
ADW is also staffed with civilian FAA controllers, not DOD/USAF
Um, media, this is not news. So her plane did a go-around. At this rate you might as well write a news story about all of the go-arounds that occur at LGA or DCA because a plane that just landed can't get off the runway in time.
Agreed. If the controller was sleeping.... well that id say that would be more newsworthy. But a go-around? Yesh desperate for a story much? Whoever wrote that article should get a slap and brought to a busy airport to see how many "news articles" that occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Holzinger
At least the Japanese animators continue to bring us accurate depictions of events like these, to counteract the other media spin...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uftLDdqnPI
That was great! :eek:
Wow...........I saw three (3), "go arounds" today (4/22) at JFK. Two of them occured simulatenously (one go around for 22L and the other go around for 13L). I'm waiting anxiously for the news media to report this as "Breaking News"!!! Great video!
Japan comes out with the stupidist animations........
Is ADW FAA or are they Dyncorp contractors?Quote:
Originally Posted by njgtr82
It's actually Chinese/Taiwanese. They've done a bunch of over-the-top Conan animations, which he replays on his show:Quote:
Originally Posted by GrummanFan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQUe0L0NVEg
Whipping panda is going to give me nightmares.
I was doing some research and found that they call the First Lady's plane Bright Star. Seems they started calling it this during the Bush Administration and still do so today. I guess it's an unofficial callsign.
I would suspect that is an internal code for the aircraft, in the same vein I've heard AF1 referred to as "Angel".