My Posts: All Forum Topic
Airframe lifetimes are typically related in cycles (takeoff/landing), not years . . . and since AF1 is not either a commercial or short hop aircraft, I would wager the speculation that it's cycle count is just a fraction of commercial airframes of the same age. "Junker"? Someonenhas been nitting the crack again . . . the airframe is passive, and the rest is maintained and updated probably far more rigorously than any commercial aircraft. Thus, I speculate that the existing AF1 is the opposite of a "junker", and more likely a "jewel in the sky". Frankly, SF1 should be a much smaller aircraft - let the press and other non-gov't staff buy thier own damn tickets on a commercial carrier!
As to the sorry state of the B52 fleet, I will bet that that is far less due to age and far more due to the current "Imbecile In Charge" that has been actively trying to decimate the military . . . Note, again,that the B52 typicaly flies longer duration missions, hence less cycles than similarly aged commercial airliners. Until the aluminum in the airframe gets so stress fatigued that cracking can't be controlled, there is nothing that a new airframe can do that an old one cannot be upfitted to . . .
Friends don't let friends become electrotarded . . . .