|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boeing E-4 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This is not a forum for general discussion about Boeing E-4. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Boeing E-4 at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
Battle staff numbers: 5+5+2=15?
One section of this article lists members of the battle staff as follows:
"The battle staff comprises force status controllers (3), emergency action controllers, operations controller, communications controller, intelligence planners (4), operations planners (4), logistic planners (4), chief of battle staff, airborne launch system officers (2), weather officer, reconnaissance planner, damage assessment officer and administrators (2), a total of 26; and communications operators (5), radio maintenance men (5) and switchboard operators (2), a total of 15."
Are there other unknown crew members missing from the list, or is this simply a matter of poor addition on the part of the author? --M. Schneider [Schneider anc] (talk • contribs) 05:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- The USAF fact sheet lists "Up to 112 (flight crew and mission crew)". Anyway I tried to shorten that to a general description type list. -Fnlayson (talk) 01:43, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Fact or Fiction: Another thought to consider for the article
The article says this plane was designed to remain airborne for at least a week. Maybe someone knows of, or can find any published sources that mention any research and development into a more advanced emergency-command craft: An airplane that would have ability, while in flight, to launch itself into space, and maintain orbit around the planet? That would be far more efficient, and possibly safer than trying to stay re-fueled and out of the path of enemy ordnance. marc s. dania fl 18.104.22.168 (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- This talk page is for improvements to the article per WP:Talk page guidelines. Your post seems to be more of a hypothetical discussion for a forum site. -Fnlayson (talk) 19:03, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- I haven't a clue, since the cited source says nothing specific about this practice. Alaska is in North America, however, while Hawaii is alone in the middle of the Pacific, so that might be part of the reason, assuming the info is even correct. - BilCat (talk) 03:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- On a subsonic jet, Hawaii is ~5 hours, minimum, from the nearest points in the continental US. Deploying the E-4B to Hilo puts it ~45 minutes from Honolulu. In the event that Air Force One were ever compromised while parked in Honolulu, that's a big difference. I've added another reference about the E-4B being in Hilo - don't know whether this will placate those who feel there should be a more detailed explanation of highly sensitive military/presidential security practices... ;) Dan (talk) 06:37, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Mainly for my own curiosity I wanted to find out where the information on the decks came from. The material about what equipment is on what deck was added in bulk by an IP anon in March 2006. Is this a copy paste from a book or something? Is it even true? --Dual Freq (talk) 00:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Not sure; I guessed the text originally came from an older USAF fact sheet or similar web page. The deck descriptions seem overly detailed to me. They probably should be shortened or summarized. -Fnlayson (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I also found numerous UPI articles telling about a bird strike incident in which one of the E-4Bs lost two engines. I didn't put it in mainly because it didn't result in a hull loss, but a dual engine loss on a 747 must be a fairly rare occurrence and I see some hull losses in the 747 list that happened after losing two engines. Maybe it's notable, if someone thought it was worth adding, the link is listed above. --Dual Freq (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)