Air Force One Cost Overruns Are a Reminder of How Expensive an Imperial Presidency Can Be
Boeing reports that the two new presidential shuttles its building will now be $2 billion over budget.

Sustaining an imperial presidency in the air isn't a cheap proposition. It's somehow managing to get more expensive.
On Thursday, airplane maker Boeing announced that the two replacement Air Force One jets it's building will be further delayed and further over budget. Securities filings first reported by the Wall Street Journal show the company expects to lose an additional $766 million on the new presidential shuttles that are also years behind schedule. That brings the company's total losses on the project to $2 billion.
Boeing cited a litany of reasons for the delays and cost overruns, including the bankruptcy of one its suppliers, COVID-caused supply chain issues, and difficulty finding workers with the requisite security clearances.
The fixed-price nature of its Air Force One contract means taxpayers aren't on the hook for the cost overruns, but Boeing has said it might ask for more money anyway. The Journal says it will still cost the public additional money to maintain the current 30-year-old Air Force One shuttles.
The $3.9 billion taxpayers are giving Boeing to build two airplanes is still pretty galling all on its own. The expense of the new jets is partially explained by the security and communications equipment they have to come with and the massive commercial airliner size. All of that is intended to keep the president in constant, secure contact with the government on the ground, while also providing enough room for journalists, foreign leaders, and other members of the president's retinue to fly along with him.
It all starts to feel monarchical pretty quickly. That's because America, despite its best historical efforts, has ended up with an imperial president who sits atop a vast federal government that spends trillions a year on various interventions and interferences in private citizens' lives. The president is also the commander of one the largest militaries in world history, whose forces are constantly embroiled in conflicts and military operations overseas.
For anyone who would prefer a far smaller federal government—and one less dependent on the whims of the executive branch in particular—the tremendous price tag of Air Force One is a reminder of how far away we are from that reality.
Ideally, the president wouldn't need to be occupied 24/7 with the details of dishwasher regulations and drone strikes while jetting off to another climate change summit. If he weren't, we'd all be a little freer, a little richer, and a little safer too. The president would also benefit from a less hectic schedule. With fewer responsibilities, he could afford to put his phone in airplane mode while he travels.
That's not the world we live in. A $3.9 billion flying White House is arguably a necessity for a modern president. We'd be better off with one who could do their job traveling in business class.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I agree with much of what the article says but think of Sept. 11th. On that day the American people needed to have a President that could be both on the move and in communication. So, I would not put AF1 on top of the list where the government need to make cuts.
No, America did not need a President taking charge. The damage was done. The 3-day standdown was about the only reasonable action, and that did not need a President flying around.
Think how different the results would have been if there had been any armed civilians on those flights. None would have reached their diverted destinations. All, including Flight 93, could have landed at their original destinations with a few dead or crying terrorists bound in the aisle; they might have been diverted to safe landings at nearer airports, but would not have needed to. And in reality, none would have been hijacked at all, because the terrorists would have known all this.
Stop thinking that government is important and its "leader" even more so.
The moral of the story is that Hollywood stories in the 70s made no impact on Americans' desire to protect themselves. After Reagan those plots went away, replaced by good guys fighting drug dealers and killing anyone who got in the way. Must have been pure coincidence. Only leftists influence the media.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot (isu-02) of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
…
Just open the link————————————–>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> ???.????????.???
hy
People should be prepared to slaughter their enemies. Especially Muslims & Marxists (a new RPG, trademark pending ). If some wacko ever threatened me with a box cutter, I’d break his fucking neck.
There were armed civilians on those flights, the terrorists.
Box cutters are not arms.
In those days, they were.
Hear me out.
Back then, the official doctrine was to allow a hijacker to have the plane. It'll have to land, they'll have to negotiate, and they get dealt with then. So crews and, at first, passengers cooperated.
These days, a box cutter is no longer arms. If you decide to take over a plane, pull a pen knife out of your pocket, say "I'm hijacking this plane", and expect to be left unmolested you are sorely mistaken. The nearest handful of burly passengers will subdue you and beat you to a pulp. And cockpit doors are locked, so you cannot get to the pilots.
The doctrine of passivity was like the treehouse of horrors, take over the pacified world with a slingshot or a board with a nail in it.
The nearest handful of burly passengers will subdue you and beat you to a pulp. And cockpit doors are locked, so you cannot get to the pilots.
^
9/11 ended hijacking.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this article... http://www.Profit97.com
The lesson is that the terrorist exploited the fact that preserving life was the priority. So, the rule was to generally follow the hijackers demands and get the plane on the ground where security forces could address the situation. The same is true today and there are persons that look for the weak spots to take advantage of them.
What America needed that day was a much much larger % of the population who could have self-organized (a la Flight 93) to meet the threat that those hijackers posed – with more relevant experience on their particular plane than those folks on Flight 93 actually had (which was team sports in high school).
Something like – you know – actual militia service with such constitutionally enumerated duties as ‘to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia’. Two of the three Americans who stopped that attack on the French train had that experience. This IS a problem with outsourcing our defense/protection to ‘professional volunteers’ – or random individual nutjobs with dreams of being a hero (are they more likely to become the hero or the hijacker or maybe the company of cops standing around a school in Uvalde waiting for a delivery from NoNuts DoNuts?).
Granted only MacGyver could have taken on the hijackers with a credit card, a pack of jello, and some dental floss. But only Bush could have calmed those kindergarteners with his reading of Billy the Randy Goatherder. He shouldn’t have exited stage right to Air Force One.
If you know what you are doing there are plenty of weapons more dangerous than box cutters on a plane. I used to build the galleys on airliners. There are plenty of things there to use. In this case MacGyver would be an amatuer.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
Heres what I d ..https://www.pay.hiring9.com
On that day the American people needed to have a President that could be both on the move and in communication.
But what it got was a president that went into hiding. So AF1 may not be so crucial after all.
That's what caused 9/11.
We, uh, actually didn't.
While the 747 was chosen as Air Force One because it has space for Presidential pet goats, Presidents who have been trained to fly should, in the interest of fuel economy, rest, and recreation, be encouraged to pilot planes of their own.
Biden and Harris should given flying lessons as part of the Green New Deal , as rechargeable electric airplanes as fast as Spitfires are now on the market.
https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2022/10/cop-27-carbon-negative-race-is-on.html
For what exactly? Political grandstanding? Self-aggrandizement? Political damage control?
So quit flying journalists.
Lighter load, less fuel.
Fewer security risks, too.
You still have the problem of how to deal with Joe Biden shitting on the floor
Deal with the same way they did when Trump shit himself.
Cite?
I sure I could find it on the internet if I just went to enough sites.
Go forth, young man
Start making money this time… Spend more time with your family & relatives by doing jobs that only require you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Hax Start bringing up to $65,000 to $70,000 a month. I’ve started this job and earn a handsome income and now I am exchanging it with you, so you can do it too.
.===)>https://www.pay.hiring9.com
I’m sure that in your wokie fever dreams that you believe that.
I have to agree here. There is no reason the President needs to fly with journalist. They could fly on secondary plane that is not so expensive. I would say the same for the Presidents entourage. Limit it to immediate family and critical staff and no more.
Two or three airplanes are cheaper than one?
They pay their own way on commercial flights.
And with luck, a few will have "administrative issues" with their visas.
First, the journalists can pay their own way. There's no good reason for the government to be paying their fares.
But if you refuse to do that, yeah, you could make the president's plane a LOT smaller and therefore less expensive and then the journalists can have a bog-standard plane. And yes, the two would still be cheaper than what's described above.
First, the journalists can pay their own way. There’s no good reason for the government to be paying their fares.
^
^ This. They can pay their own goddamn way.
As long as a nuclear threat exist an aircraft with Air Force One's capabilities. The original intent was to evacuate most of the White House Staff to AF1. That's why the extra seating is there. They just use it for reporters instead of them being left vacant. The evacuation of the WH was about the only thing the makers of the movie Independence Day got right.
The size of AF1 has little to do with the cost. It's the electronics that make it so expensive.
Same argument shows up with idiots saying two half-size aircraft carriers are better than one because they are two targets for the same price. They ignore that the major price is not the hull, but the engines, electronics, catapults, arresting gear, maintenance gear, and a whole lotta doubled up crew. The actual hull is very little of the completed warship cost.
Air force one.........half.
I’ve made $1250 so far this week working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’AM made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Here’s what I do for more information simply.
Open this link thank you...........>>> onlinecareer1
Exactly. Journalists can fucking fly commercial. If I was president, I'd be flying on a loaned out Air Force C-17 with a VIP pallet. VP can stay at the White House and answer the phones.
Why let uncleared journalists freeload on Air Force One?
The Fourth Estate deserves an Air Force Four of its own and the right plane for the job is the high Presidential mileage Boeing 727 the courts seized from Jeffrey Epstein
2 Billion a piece and climbing. About the cost of a B-2 bomber. In 1997.
And just like that; reason decided Muslims were not so cool
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/kevindowneyjr/2022/11/03/michigan-muslims-rock-the-casbah-over-gay-porn-in-schools-jumping-en-masse-to-the-gop-n1642414
It's almost like pet racial, ethnic, and gender groups are just props for the political agenda of the day.
Virtually every position they take can be viewed through the mexicans/pot/ass sex model, unless Welch is involved in which case NATO becomes the 4th hobby horse.
In this case, it's butt-sex that reason cares about.
How long are the planes used for?
The article says the current ones are 30 years old. There's probably some rounding in there but that's a decent approximation for depreciation.
Figuring that sooner or later we'll have to pick up the full tab, either in the direct taxpayer-paid costs, in indirect subsidies to Boeing through other purchases or eventually their losses getting baked into the cost of commercial products, that works out to about $200 million per year just for the planes. Probably that much again for the staff, maintenance, fuel, spare parts, etc. to run them each year.
I don't have a good sense of it then. That comes out to about 400 million a year to pay for the president. It's a lot of money in raw terms, I'm not clear it's a huge amount compared to... what? Considering how wild the federal budget is in general I can't easily place if this is that wild for the president.
I'm curious now, how much is the actual total compensation for the president any given year? Not just salary, but cost of staff, travel, things like that?
The cost of having SleepyJoe in the white house is incalculable.
^
As a comparison point, the education department is around 78 billion. The overall budget for 2021 was around 6.8 trillion.
A useful metric would be tax revenue, not how much the fuckers manage to spend in spite of it. I'm not trying to shoot the messenger here, but JFC we can't continue to keep this up.
That's a reasonable request. According to the least-bad information I could quickly find, the feds take in about $9000 per year per person in combined income, payroll and estate taxes.
Assuming that's close to right, the total taxes of almost 45,000 of us go to paying for nothing but those two jets. Again, that's not a one-time costs. That's the year-over-year cost of depreciation and maintenance.
Boeing had the same issues and overruns when those 30 year aircraft were made. It seems to be a habit with Boeing.
That's not the world we live in. A $3.9 billion flying White House is arguably a necessity for a modern president. We'd be better off with one who could do their job traveling in business class.
I agree, that is not the world we live in. The question is how to get back to a world with strong republican values (lower case R) where we can return to viewing politicians as our hired help and not above us? I have no fucking clue. I fear the Kennedy Assassination also put a president traveling on non-secured transit out of the question.
Nuclear weapons and the Cuban missile crusts prevent a president from flying non-secured.
President has to authorize nuclear weapons. Can't wait 6 hours for a plane to finish a flight when nukes take less than 30 minutes to hit.
We're not putting the nuclear genie back in the bottle any time soon.
Well, luckily we have near instantaneous, secure aerial and ground communications, so Sleepy Joe could be in a Sopwith Camel and still launch nukes. He could authorize nukes from his hospice bed for Chrissakes. That doesn't require we spend 3+billion on a posh ride. Put him in the backseat of an F18 and call it a day.
The president shouldn't be doing a lot of flying; he's an administrator, and in 2022 can do most things by VC.
Do you seriously think Biden is actually making that decision? It's a group of people around him, based on political considerations.
So, that decision process is something that should be revisited anyway. The decision should probably be made by a group of people in secure locations, via majority vote.
Arguably, the decision to use nuclear force should result in the immediate death of the people voting for that decision in order to create an appropriate threshold.
Especially not with a drooling senile imbecile like Biden being puppeteered by academic wokie retards having nuclear authority. The democrats ar snow and existential threat to the human race.
Time for them to go.
Wasn’t Trump complaining about the price and wanted to cancel?
That might have been the helicopters.
Sort of...
I don't recall him ever threatening to cancel, but early in his term he publicly criticized Boeing for gouging the taxpayers with the AF1 replacements.
Funny, Britches' article made no mention of this.
You know. Long TDS makes that impossible.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-threatens-cancel-air-force-one-order-boeing-stock-slips-n692511
Disaffected, whiny, anti-government cranks are among my favorite culture war casualties.
Fuck off and die, asshole bigot. Make your family proud.
“The great and powerful government can do no wrong”
/Arty the retard
How does it feel to be meaningless?
Disaffected, whiny, anti-government cranks are among my favorite culture war casualties.
Just out of curiosity, how much money needs to be set on fire before complaining about is no longer 'whiny' but is in fact 'sensible?'
Remember fArtie's culture is taking on anime characters as his name-sake.
Boo boo hoo , now run away.
You cunts are about to lose, and lose big. So I’m not sure what the fuck you think you’re talking about. And your social agenda is getting kicked back hard in Mia tof the country.
If people had any real sense, wokie retards like you would be torn apart in the streets.
The reason it's a 747 is the Air Force has a 4 engine requirement. If a 2 engine plane loses one engine it has to immediately land. A 4 engine plane can safely fly on 3 engines. The 747 can also fly anywhere non stop. Useful when you're traveling overseas. No need to worry about landing permissions.
Only alternative might be an Airbus A380 or A350.
Want a smaller plane? You're designing it from scratch to meet those requirements.
Yeah, because inflight refueling isn't a thing, right? Why just 4 engines? If two fail, he'd still have to land. We proles ride around in 2 engine jets all the time without dying. Why should the President get more? Why not 8 engines? Change the requirements. When people lose their jobs, they'd like to keep that Lincoln Navigator to drive, but they can still get to work in a pickup truck with 80K miles. These guys aren't kings, why treat them as such?
If a 2 engine plane loses one engine it has to immediately land.
Air Force One may have special requirements but in general that's not a true statement. See ETOPS. Commercial twin jets don't even have to immediately land with no engines.
An A350 is a twin jet.
Air Force One is also capable of mid-air refueling.
The current AF1's never in-flight refuel. Its one of the reasons Trump wanted to take that capability off the new ones.
No, that's not true. Modern twin engine passenger aircraft/triple 7, 787 even Airbus with better more efficient turbofan jet engines can and will fly on a single engine. The flight control software will make all the necessary trim adjustments to maintain straight and level flight until the plane can land at a suitable airport.
Loss of a single engine does not mean the plane will crash.
Air Force 1 isn’t just a show piece. It’s a mobile command center for world war 3. It’s not like other planes where you can accept losses.
Remember when Trump was criticized for demanding the costs of AF1 be lowered? I do.
So, I just went back and found PBS and CNN articles written at the time. You’d think if anyone would criticize him they would. It’s just straight reporting with no criticism.
So, can you provide a cite of this criticism?
That's how the media treated Trump when he was pretty much on the money. Literally and figuratively.
Wow, that’s really harsh criticism.
From the NY Times:
And then there are a string of articles where Boeing whines that it lost "a billion dollars" on the deal with the Trump white house which, aren't so much presented as direct criticism of President Trump, but more a media that's more than eager to air out the grievances of Boeing.
“which, aren’t so much presented as direct criticism of President Trump”
Just a withering storm of criticism. We must never forget these grievances against dear Trump!
Those in-flight crack pipes for your kids aren't cheap.
I really hope our rapist molesting president’s rapist molesting son OD’s hard. They’re a malignant bunch of shitweasels that have done irreparable damage to this country.
I assume some of the cost is for electronic countermeasures and missle defense systems.
Which have been bought and paid for with thousands of military jets. Strip a few wires and fit it up. I know it's not THAT simple, but it isn't the engineering equivalent of landing a balloon on Mars either. We have lost sight of practicality. This shit isn't rocket science, we just need to demand better.
Ground all private jets until they stop fucking the "little people" for climate change stuff.
Just get rid of the wokies.
If the president is in a situation where he/she/they really need extra security, I am sure the Air Force has plenty of jets that would fit the bill. The rest of the time, let him/her/them fly Spirit or Frontier.
So Trump, the most supposed "imperial" president wanted to cancel these, but Reason's choice, Biden supports it.
Okay
Seriously, why do I keep coming back to this site? Is it actually employing any intelligent adults to write for it?
If you stripped down the current federal government to just those functions that the Founders would recognize, and you stripped down our military to just what was necessary to defend the US from aggression, you'd still need the President to have a command and control platform suitable for use during a nuclear war, because none of those changes would actually change the fact that the US is a large, populous, and wealthy target for would-be aggressors.
And to price that, well, a base civilian 747 is currently running around $0.5 billion. And look at the inflation-adjusted procurement-and-upgrade prices of the E-4B, or the current estimates for the SAOC replacements for the E-4B. A bit less than $2 billion per plane for a 747 upgraded so it can be used as a command post by the commander-in-chief of the US's armed forces during a legitimate war is not a price particularly inflated by any of the other things going on with an "imperial presidency", a bloated federal government, or the like.
Yes, sure, the US could just have a survivable command post aircraft flying around shadowing a President everywhere he goes, instead of having him fly on one to those destinations. And at that point the amount of money being "saved" is a rounding error at best.
I think all politicians and executive branch members should be forced to fly commercial (economy or business). Even the president. No extra security. Congress should use rented suburban office buildings and we can transform the Capitol into a museum.
Stripping politicians and bureaucrats of such symbols of power and status would do a great deal to return US politics to some semblance of sanity.
"Lazy and Stupid" Biden mis-estimated (if he did at all) BBB by about $1 Trillion dollars -- what does that tell you
Dec 13, 2021 — CBO Report Shows True Cost of Biden Administration's Build Back Better Plan Closer to $5
You think that's an accident? Democrats are always deliberately low-balling the cost of their programs.
You mean 'Build back Bolshevik".
I’ve made $1250 so far this week working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’AM made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Here’s what I do for more information simply.
Open this link thank you...........>>> onlinecareer1
One can surmise the extra cost includes and ice cream machine and freezer to keep enough in stock for ole Joe and Nancy . I mean just how expensive can an ice cream maker cost even if it’s for the great Air Force 1? There needs to be an investigation into why there are so many cost over runs. The government cannot continue spending like a drunken sailor. Eventually everyone will pay the price for out of control government spending. Air Force One should be the poster child of deficit spending.
Maybe it should be called Ice Cream One
Stuck without air conditioning on the tropical isle of Tinian, B-29 crews tasked with bombing Japan complained of the lack of ice cream on the menu for lack of an ice cream machine on the ground.
They solved the problem by inviting some cooks to bring their industrial strength dough mixer aboard, with plenty of sugar , cream, cocoa and fruit and flew it up to 30,000 feet and ten below zero, where it churned out ice cream galore .
“Boeing reports that the two new presidential shuttles its (sic) building will now be $2 billion over budget.”
Not sure dishwasher regulations are what is driving this. Like it or not, POTUS is probably the most important person in the world when it comes to international relations. It you agree that he primary legitimate role of the Federal government is national defense / international relations, then having this tool may not be the luxury it's being painted as.