Talk:Boeing E-4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Battle staff numbers: 5+5+2=15?[edit]

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] (talkcontribs) 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[edit]

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 206.192.35.125 (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)
What part of "Maybe someone knows of, or can find published sources that mention... ...." did you not understand? Marc S. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 17:34, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, I saw that. Is that really related to the E-4 and this article? -Fnlayson (talk) 17:51, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
you "saw that." But what part of it did you not understand? Marc S. Dania Fl206.192.35.125 (talk) 13:22, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hawaii[edit]

Why does it apply to Hawaii? does it also apply to Alaska? are there any cultural or political reasons for that? Bumblebritches57 (talk) 01:03, 5 February 2014 (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)

Decks[edit]

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.[1] 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)

Mishaps[edit]

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)

I also found several class A mishaps in the 2000s. May 2002 HF antenna failure, $5.1 mil damage, Feb 2004 engine failure, $3.4 mill damage, Summary - May 2010 tail striking runway on landing, $3.1 mil damage (Full narrative). --Dual Freq (talk) 20:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Disputing Cost of Flight[edit]

In the Design section, the following line is used:

The E-4 is the most expensive aircraft in the Air Force inventory to operate, even more than the B-2 stealth bomber, costing $155,000 per flight hour.[12]

Although I am not disputing the cost per flight hour, the line stating that "The E-4 is the most expensive aircraft in the Air Force inventory to operate..." is shown to be incorrect. According to documents from the Department of The Air Force Headquarters Air Mobility Command, Air Force One has an associated cost of $228,288.00 per flight hour. The document in question was a response to a FOIA request from Judicial Watch and is available here.

Perhaps it would be more appropriate for the page to list the E-4 as "one of the most expensive..."?

Meurode (talk) 07:05, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Not really notable so I have removed it. MilborneOne (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Boeing E-4. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)