Donald Trump's new ‘flying palace' won't be much like Air Force One

Politico

19-05-2025

THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING — President Donald Trump is back in Washington after a four-day trip around the Middle East that both put more miles on the aging current Air Force One and set the stage for what Trump hopes will be a shiny new model.
During the trip, Trump indicated that he would accept a gift plane from the Qatari royal family to serve as a new official presidential aircraft. There are currently two identical 747-200s as well as some smaller presidential aircraft that are part of the 'Air Force One' fleet.
This announcement riled up everyone from pro-Trump influencer Laura Loomer to Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, who called the gift 'the definition of corruption.'
But Trump might be especially licking his chops at the idea of a new presidential aircraft because of the state of the old ones, in use since 1990, with conversations to replace them since the Obama administration. In 2018, the Air Force formalized a contract with Boeing to deliver two new planes, which are behind schedule.
The Qatari jet is loaded with modern amenities and opulence. What it won't be equipped for in the same way is the ability to serve as a 'flying White House,' according to Frank Kendall, who served as the Secretary of the Air Force during the Biden administration. To understand more about the state of play of the current and future Air Force One, Nightly spoke with Kendall. This interview has been edited.
What are the major differences between a commercial 747 and Air Force One?
It's a pretty dramatic difference. One way to get a frame of reference is a commercial aircraft of this size is going to cost roughly $200 million to $300 million. Air Force One costs about $2 billion, and the reason is that it's a flying White House. You try to put onto the aircraft everything that the president would get for support when he's in the White House. The capabilities of the Situation Room, full medical support, the ability to host people, because it's an aircraft that has to go to foreign places and carry the President and his staff and so on. You have support capabilities, food service and storage capacity for that long enough to cover the duration of a trip.
You also have some things there for security, Secret Service and the White House put extensive security on the aircraft. When you add all those things together, they're expensive and they also are very hard to get into an airplane. So what we always struggle with in these aircrafts is getting into them everything that the White House team wants to have for the support of the president.
And what are the differences between the plane Qatar is offering and Air Force One?
Essentially, it's a flying palace. It's very luxurious on the inside. It's all custom printed out to whatever specifications that the customer may have. And it's often, quite frankly, very opulent. Things like either gold- or platinum-plated fixtures, silk carpeting and wall coverings, all custom made, for a very luxurious period of time while you're flying on the airplane. But what it doesn't have to that point is many of the capabilities that you're talking about with Air Force One. You would not have any of the ability to have a nuclear conference call, highly secure communications, highly reliable communications of various types. Protective measures. There might be some medical support on board for whoever the owner was, but nothing like what you'd have for the president, and there wouldn't be any storage capacity for support for the president and staff over a long period of time.
This situation began because of the difficulties that Boeing has had delivering their orders for a new Air Force One on time. Can you explain the timeline and Boeing's struggles?
Yeah, the order has been out for about 10 years now. You can foresee when these airplanes are going to wear out, and you can try to keep maintaining airplanes longer than really makes economic sense to do. During the first Trump administration, a price was set between the CEO of Boeing and President Trump, at $3.9 billion for two aircrafts, and Boeing took a fixed price contract to deliver to the requirements. And they have really, really struggled to do that. They've lost, I think, over $2 billion already on the program, and have found some issues they didn't anticipate. Boeing's just really struggled to try to get these two airplanes delivered.
When you worked in the Obama administration, you were also discussing a new Air Force One purchase, correct?
We hadn't finalized the contract. We had decided on a 747, there wasn't really much choice about that. They were coming out of production, and we were basically going to take an aircraft and modify it. One of the problems they got into was structural issues. That was not on our radar or something we expected to see happen.
What are the specific security components of Air Force One?
I can say, basically communications should be reliable under almost any circumstances, to other key leadership, to foreign leaders. You might need to talk to governors in a national disaster, for example. So we try to put a pretty complete suite of communications capabilities that are going to be dependable. You need to have the ability to do conference calls, for example; that's an important part of doing the work of the president. I can't really say much of anything about what might be there to provide for his security while he's on the airplane. Sure, there are measures to do that, and there have been some stories I've seen in the press about what those might be, but I don't think I'm allowed to say anything specific about that.
What are the influence concerns with Qatar potentially providing a new Air Force One?
Again, I'm going off of press reports about business dealings that the Trump business organization, as well as the Trump family, has with Qatar. As far as the U.S. relationship with Qatar, there may be issues there as well. If nothing else, the appearance here is not attractive. As a government person of any type, I would not have been allowed to accept gifts. The president could potentially accept this, I believe, on behalf of the American people if it became property of the American people; the analogy to the Statue of Liberty has been made sometimes. But the problem with this, as I understand it, is he's going to take the airplane with him when he leaves office. It's going to go to his personal presidential library, which is not a government institution, and having that as part of the condition of the gift makes it personal.
One other issue that's getting a very strong reaction from people in his own party is, we don't want our American president flying on a gift from Qatar. This is the plane that represents America. It represents the American people. It represents the office of the presidency. It's not just about Donald Trump.
The president has the right to waive any concerns about security or influence in the purchase of the aircraft though, correct?
The requirements are not set by statute. They're not provided by Congress. These are things that we determine internally in the federal government are military or operational necessities.
The president, ultimately, is in charge. He's the commander-in-chief, he's the chief executive. So he can choose, in an extreme example, to say 'I don't want any of this stuff. I will just put the vice president in charge while I'm on the airplane.' No president's ever done that, but that's a possibility.
There's an office that works for him that sets those requirements, but it works for him, and so if he prioritizes, as appears to have happened in this case, to get a new airplane with the colors he prefers while he's in office, he has latitude as the commander-in-chief to say 'I'm just going to take the plane. I'll take whatever communications are already on there.' A lot of people will push back and try to get him to do more than that, but at the end of the day, he's in charge.
Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at [e-mail]. Or contact tonight's author at [e-mail] or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @calder_mchugh.
What'd I Miss?
— Trump says Russia and Ukraine will 'immediately' start ceasefire talks: President Donald Trump expressed optimism following a two-hour phone call today with Russian President Vladimir Putin about 'immediately' starting ceasefire talks with Ukraine, but seemed to signal that the U.S. would no longer seek to play a mediating role in ending the three-year war. 'The conditions for [a ceasefire] will be negotiated between the two parties, as it can only be, because they know the details of a negotiation that nobody else would be aware of,' Trump wrote in a TruthSocial post.
— Republicans tweak megabill's SNAP, Medicaid provisions: The GOP megabill is undergoing some significant changes in the House as conservative hard-liners, moderates and blue-state Republicans all angle to shape the bill to their liking ahead of a potential floor vote this week. Conservatives are still pushing for controversial changes to the federal share of Medicaid payments, which could lead to major benefit cuts, but House Republican leadership, moderates and the White House are all still resisting that effort, according to two Republicans granted anonymity to describe the private talks. Medicaid work requirements, though, are expected to be phased in two years, addressing the hard-liners' push to speed up the previously planned 2029 implementation.
— Federal judge rules Trump administration's efforts to dismantle US Institute of Peace are 'unlawful': A federal judge blocked the Trump administration today from dismantling the embattled U.S. Institute of Peace, the independent, congressionally funded organization taken over by the Department of Government Efficiency two months ago. In a memorandum opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell argued that the actions taken by administration officials and DOGE to break apart USIP were 'unlawful' and that the removal of the institute's president, George Moose, subsequently installing DOGE official Kenneth Jackson as his replacement and the transfer of USIP property to the General Services Administration must be declared 'null and void.'
— Appeals court questions EPA's termination of $20B climate grants: A panel of appellate judges appeared skeptical today of EPA's reasons for terminating $20 billion in Biden-era climate grants, but it indicated the dispute could end up in a different court. During over two hours of oral arguments, the three judges questioned the timing and authority of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin's termination of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grants, which were intended to support climate and affordable housing projects using funds from Democrats' climate law.
— Trump signs Take It Down Act, criminalizing deepfake and revenge porn: President Donald Trump signed a law today criminalizing the spread of nonconsensual intimate imagery, including AI-generated deepfakes and revenge porn. The Rose Garden ceremony, dotted with cabinet officials and lawmakers, marks a major policy win for first lady Melania Trump, who championed the Take It Down Act as part of her revitalized Be Best initiative.
AROUND THE WORLD
HANDSHAKE AGREEMENT — Britain and the European Union have agreed to cooperate more closely on support for Ukraine, while promising a further deal allowing U.K. companies to benefit from an EU plan to boost defense spending. The partnership struck by Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at today's summit in London says the two sides will 'swiftly explore' the potential for the U.K. to gain access to a €150 billion loan program for defense procurement.
The Commission's fund allows states within the bloc to jointly procure weapons but is closed to non-EU countries that do not have a defense deal with the EU. Both sides raised expectations that a further agreement on admitting British firms to the program would be agreed shortly, with von der Leyen specifying it could come within 'only a few weeks.'
MINERAL WATER-GATE — Call it the French Watergate. The iconic French mineral water brand Perrier is at the center of a fresh scandal that threatens to bubble over and hit the highest levels of government. Nestlé Waters lobbied France's government, including people close to French President Emmanuel Macron, to make possible the sale of branded mineral water that circumvented stringent French regulations, effectively misleading consumers, according to a damning Senate report released today.
At the heart of the accusations are Nestlé Waters's allegedly unauthorized use of carbon filters and ultraviolet light — methods normally used on tap water — to treat mineral water for several of its brands, including its flagship sparkling water Perrier. But France's stringent regulations aim to ensure that natural mineral water remains pure and unaltered, justifying the steep price tag paid by consumers.
Anger over the alleged lobbying scandal threatens to further hurt an already embattled Macron as he fights political deadlock and low approval ratings. Asked about the Élysée's role in the Nestlé Waters case in February, Macron said he was 'not aware of such things' and that there had been no 'agreement' or 'collusion.'
NOT WELCOME — Russia announced today it would ban human rights NGO Amnesty International in the Kremlin's latest crackdown on civil society groups opposing its war in Ukraine. The federal prosecutor's office declared in a statement that Amnesty was the 'center of preparation of global Russophobic projects' and was in league with Ukraine, which Russia has waged war on for more than a decade.
'They justify the crimes of Ukrainian neo-Nazis, call for an increase in their funding, insist on the political and economic isolation of our country,' the prosecutor's office said, designating Amnesty 'undesirable,' meaning it cannot operate in Russia.
Since Moscow's full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, Amnesty — which says it campaigns for human rights worldwide — has documented Russian war crimes and called for the perpetrators to be held to account.
Nightly Number
RADAR SWEEP
DIGITAL DETOX — As people become more addicted to their phones, a growing coalition is choosing to limit their screen time — or abstain from smartphones altogether. There's even a nickname for them — the 'appstinent' — a group of people who worry their phones make them less social and productive and are actually willing to do something to fix the issue. Some simply delete social media while others turn to so-called dumb phones, equipped with call and text but not email or social media. But in a digitally dependent world, it's not so simple to just go back to using a flip phone, with issues like being unable to access some forms of two-factor authentication. Julia Pugachevsky reports for Business Insider.
Parting Image
Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.