If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.
Posted on 05/22/2006 7:54:31 PM PDT by naturalman1975
US President George W Bush's Air Force One aircraft damaged the runway when it landed at Canberra airport in 2003, leaving Australian taxpayers to pick up the bill, a parliamentary committee has been told.
The high-tech Boeing 747 jumbo jet, dubbed the flying White House, was much heavier than most aircraft that land on the runway and caused damage to the pavement.
Other military and VIP planes had also damaged the runway but the visit by Air Force One worried the airport owners to the point where they raised concerns about the weight of the jet with the Federal Government.
In response to questioning from Opposition transport spokesman Kerry O'Brien, a parliamentary committee today heard the Government had agreed to fix the runway.
Department of Transport and Regional Services deputy secretary Mike Mrdak said the Commonwealth did make "arrangements" to fix any damage done to the runway.
Those arrangements were delivered in last year's Budget, with the Government providing $28.5 million for runway strengthening at Canberra.
Bureaucrats fronting the committee denied it was solely the visit of Air Force One that had forced the strengthening work.
Senator O'Brien then asked why no heavy jets had landed on the runway since the visit by President Bush.
"It's interesting that after the Bush visit the dispensations (for heavy jet landings) had been discontinued," Senator O'Brien said.
Mr Mrdak replied: "There's a point at which the surface limitations come into affect and the airport operator does not wish to see further pavement damage and that was reached from that time on."
Canberra airport is the only airport in Australia to receive federal funding for runway strengthening.
That would make sense. I've seen empty 737's crack pads at DFW and Love.
That's another possibility.
But the bottom line remains, AF1 is most likely A LOT lighter than a loaded 747 like you normally see taking off and landing on near every major airport on this planet. It's an old plane, a generic plane and it probably is much lighter than what the standard 747 weighs as well. In other words, no matter how they try to turn this, it wasn't AF1. It may be a lack of investmant for repairs, mismanagement of pad space, it can be a lot of things. I don't know. But it's safe to say that AF1 didn't cause any damage beyond that of any other normal jet going into that airport.
If they left the MSM jerks that deadhead a ride on AF1 there would be a lot less weight to haul. All that walking bovine excrement would leave the aircraft a LOT lighter.
Cannibalism no matter which species ain't pretty. :-)
Can you imagine the poor shark who gets to Helen Thomas first?
Somehow they act surprised that a 747, technology over 35 years old, was heavy. Apparently no one in the world had experienced this phenomenon until it was thrust upon them by President Bush.
You'd think Australia would have a runway capable of handling 707's or 747's at an airport near their nation's capitol.
The 747 can use any runway that a 707 can use.
Garbage from an obvious GWB hater. Try big Frenchy A-3 ga zillions or C-17's or something else, dirtbag.
Nixon did the same thing -- in the old AF1, a 707 in those days. I was holding at Orange County airport when the tower shut all operations down for his arrival. They had been warned that the bearing strength of the runway was too weak for that large a plane -- but Nixon told them to do it anyway because it was a big political deal to show up there.
The plane left 2 inch grooves in asphalt that was hot from the summer sun. This made the runway dangerous to use for smaller planes. But politics has always trumped safety, reason and common sense. The runway was closed for a week for repairs...
If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.
AF1 Doesn't even need a runway. ;-)
LOL!
It's actually not unusual for runways to have restrictions on landing weight that are well below the weight of a 747. I worked at such an airport until recently, but in October 2004 President Bush flew in on Air Force One anyway. It took special permission from the airport authority (along with an engineering study to make sure it was safe). No damage done by the 747, or by the C-17 or C-130 that cart around the support equipment, limos, Suburbans, etc.
Is that supposed to be a new commercial for Jenny Craig?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.