AF1 range/route/refueling?

"David Lesher" wrote in message
...
"Ragnar" writes:



Was there an unannounced refueling stop? I know the 747B's have
capability for in-flight refueling but doubt they would do that.

Why would you doubt that?


A friend was on a KC10 that got refueled twice en-route to Africa.
He vividly described the number of PX's who lost their lunch into
the issued barf bags.

One anecdotal example of wussy passengers does not mean air refuelling is
either dangerous or rare.

The only reason for the refueling was proficiency
practice for the crew.

So? The only way to get air refuelling proficiency is to do it.

I doubt the AF1 crew practices that aspect that all that often

Your doubts are based on faulty assumptions.

, and
in fact don't know it's ever been used.

All flight crew on air refuelable aircraft are required to perform A/R
proficiency a set number of times per month, quarter, and year. The B747
used for the President is air refuellable and has a flight crew. Ergo, they
do A/R.

I'll let BUFDVR etc comment
but I'd always read it was somewhat risky maneuver on the best days.

Risky? Flying in and of itself is risky. Perhaps you could do some basic
research and check out how many times A/R has resulted in the loss of an
aircraft. You'll find that taking off and landing in perfect weather is
more dangerous.

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...


Risky? Flying in and of itself is risky. Perhaps you could do some basic
research and check out how many times A/R has resulted in the loss of an
aircraft. You'll find that taking off and landing in perfect weather is
more dangerous.



I can think of at least one hi-profile accident and thats the B-52
that went down at Palomares , Spain with live weapons aboard.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...


Risky? Flying in and of itself is risky. Perhaps you could do some
basic
research and check out how many times A/R has resulted in the loss of an
aircraft. You'll find that taking off and landing in perfect weather is
more dangerous.



I can think of at least one hi-profile accident and thats the B-52
that went down at Palomares , Spain with live weapons aboard.

Yes, in 1966. If thats the best incident that can be recalled, then my
original point is well validated.

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 07:55:02 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:


"Ragnar" wrote in message
...


Risky? Flying in and of itself is risky. Perhaps you could do some basic
research and check out how many times A/R has resulted in the loss of an
aircraft. You'll find that taking off and landing in perfect weather is
more dangerous.



I can think of at least one hi-profile accident and thats the B-52
that went down at Palomares , Spain with live weapons aboard.


I know a guy whose father was the navigator on a KC-135 that a B-52
ran into over Kentucky in 1959. The resulting fireball dropped
wreckage over a wide area, including unarmed nuclear weapons.
All of the KC-135 and some of the B-52 crew perished. This accident
resulted in the "breakaway" procedures.

John Hairell )

David Lesher wrote:

Was there an unannounced refueling stop? I know the 747B's have
capability for in-flight refueling but doubt they would do that.

Why would you doubt that?

A friend was on a KC10 that got refueled twice en-route to Africa.
He vividly described the number of PX's who lost their lunch into
the issued barf bags. The only reason for the refueling was proficiency
practice for the crew.

I doubt the AF1 crew practices that aspect that all that often, and
in fact don't know it's ever been used. I'll let BUFDVR etc comment
but I'd always read it was somewhat risky maneuver on the best days.

Any aircrew flying the aircraft would have specific currency
requirements for Air Refuelling, and if the crew isn't current
in it, they won't be flying on any operational mission. As far
as getting practice, they fly many sorties without passengers
specifically to get their various currencies updated.

As for air refuelling being risky, I don't think it is all
that risky, and I do it regularly in a C-130 behind both
KC-135s and -10s. C-141s and C-5s carrying both passengers
and cargo refuel as necessary based on their mission profiles,
AFAIK.

Mike

David Lesher wrote in message ...
Turkey Dinner Tour

Now, http://gc.kls2.com/ says the Great Circle distance KADW-BGW
is 6200m, and AF1 has a published range of ~~7300 miles.

But Great Circle would have taken them across multiple countries,
including those evil fried potato folks; so I'd assume they did
not use that route.

I'd also assume they would never get near trouble without large
reserves.

Was there an unannounced refueling stop? I know the 747B's have
capability for in-flight refueling but doubt they would do that.


My guess is the flight was filed on a random track to
Portugal/southern Spain and then across the Med and across Turkey.
Given the time frame the eastbound NATs were active so they would have
stayed away from that elephant herd. Besides they would overfly all of
Europe that way. The best option would be to stay well south and go
feet wet immediately.
If they used a generic RCH ICAO (they could have always "borrowed" an
N number) filing it would not have raised any suspicions in the
various ACCs since lots of Reach flights are going to and fro. The
various controlling agencies would have no way of knowing that it
wasn't some scrufty 747 freightdawg from Evergreen or Polar.
A little digression. I would bet there are more than a few security
compromises in the various Middle Eastern ACCs that needed to be
considered.
A refueling just east of Spain somewhere would have been no problem
since its pretty empty out there and Santa Maria is laid back. I doubt
they would have landed anywhere because somebody somewhere would have
gotten on a phone or sent an email telling the tale of what they just
saw, although Lajes, Rota, and Torrejon are candidates I suppose. That
would have given them the fuel to get into SDA (or whatever its called
now) and back out over the Med and a join up with another tanker and
come back to the states.
I sure would like to know where the BA spotted them. My guess would be
in the crossing north-south traffic off of the west coast of Europe
since it was daylight by the time he would have been there.