Skip to main content

The newest Air Force One is flying, but is it ready to deal with all the threats a president faces?

Washington, DC (CNN) — When President Donald Trump departed Turkey this week, he boarded a 35-year-old modified Boeing 747, not the newly converted plane parked across the tarmac that had been introduced with much fanfare just days earlier.

The decision intensified scrutiny of the Qatari-donated jet, which was converted on an unusually compressed timeline, raising questions about whether it received the communications, security and defensive upgrades necessary to serve as the heavily fortified “flying White House.”

The latest flight happened as the United States launched strikes on Iran, which shares a border with Turkey.

Air Force One could be a “dangerous plane because of the sleaze bags we have to deal with,” Trump said shortly after takeoff on the old jet. “These are sick people, so I could see something like that.”

There was no specific, new threat to Trump’s life, sources told CNN; however, the president had mentioned the possibility of an assassination attempt from Iran during the NATO summit.

The former Qatari jet was flown for the first time by the president at the start of July after about a year of upgrades and conversions.

Several Republican senators expressed misgivings about accepting the plane, pointing to the potential for security and legal risks. Trump’s intention to send the plane to his presidential library after he leaves office also raised ethical concerns.

“There’s never been a plane like this ever built, and there will never be a plane like this built again,” Trump said at the plane’s unveiling on July 17.

The accelerated conversion has led some aviation and security experts to question whether every critical upgrade was completed before the aircraft entered presidential service.

Experts notice key differences

Most details related to Air Force One are classified for security purposes, but there are some obvious visible changes from the Boeing 747-200s delivered during President George H. W. Bush’s term.

Aside from the new paint scheme and larger size, the Boeing 747-800 aircraft sports more fuel-efficient engines and a longer range.

The White House has not publicly detailed the defensive upgrades but said the changes were focused on essential systems and not cosmetic updates.

“By making minimal changes to the previous head-of-state interior, the Air Force fielded the aircraft faster without accepting any risk regarding security, safety, or secure communications,” a senior administration official told CNN.

However, some experts are concerned about how the roughly year-long effort to modify the aircraft may not have been sufficient to fully harden it for operations in high-threat airspace.

Trump wanted the new plane in the air by July 4, and made his first trip in it on July 3, to Bismarck, North Dakota, to attend the opening of the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library.

“It was a schedule driven modification,” Frank Kendall, the former Air Force secretary under the Biden administration, told CNN.

“To do that, they would have had to leave out a lot of things that are on a regular Air Force One,” he said. “You have to add all the things that are required for the president, and that’s why it takes so long and costs so much money. So, they did what they could with the time that they had.”

It remains unclear what defensive systems the new plane has. While it may not be needed for a trip to North Dakota, flying in the Middle East can pose different threats – especially when missiles are still flying in an ongoing war.

Boeing 747s are generally not equipped with missile countermeasures; however, the older presidential fleet is widely believed to include them.

Aviation observers studying pictures of the aircraft said the new plane appears to lack external modifications to the tail cone associated with a type of directional infrared missile defense system. However, the absence of visible features does not definitively establish which systems are or are not installed.

The older planes are also believed to carry chaff, bundles of metallic strips shot out of the aircraft to create false radar targets and confuse radar-guided missiles.

Antennas are critical to ensure the plane’s communications are secure, Kendall said, adding, “You have to basically do structural changes to put the antennas in. Some of that, I’m sure they did. I’m not sure how much.”

It’s also not clear what kind of defense the new jets have in case of nuclear attacks and associated electromagnetic pulses compared to the old ones which were designed during the Cold War.

The “inside” is what is “undoubtedly missing” from the aircraft, said Richard Aboulafia, the managing director of AeroDynamic Advisory, an aerospace management consulting firm. The budget and time to complete the process were simply not there.

“Install an integrated and well fused electronic warfare and self-protection system, electronic countermeasures, chaff, even flare dispensers, whatever else,” Aboulafia said. “The other, of course, is to establish a very extensive communication suite, allowing encrypted communications with national and allied commanders all over the world. This is an extremely extensive and time-consuming process.”

Air Force One typically also includes a medical suite that can function as an operating room, and a doctor is permanently on board, according to the White House.

It’s a “flying White House,” Kendall described, from communications, medical care, and critical security to be fit for a president. He estimates the Qatari jet would’ve needed three to four years of modifications to meet the same standards as the older Boeing 747s.

“I think in all three of those areas: the life support, the commander in chief support, the comms, and the security side, they probably did less by a substantial amount than a full-up Air Force One,” Kendall said.

The new plane also lacks aerial refueling, noticable in a bump on the plane’s nose. The seldom used capability to take on fuel in mid-air makes the range the old plane can fly practically unlimited. However, the new planes Boeing is currently working on, that will eventually replace the Qatari donated jet, will not have that capability either.

“This plane is the first successful example of a real transformation of something that was built at the highest level and now had to be changed a little bit,” Trump said when the plane was unveiled.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

Gobierno de Trump abre los hábitats de especies en peligro a la urbanización y revierte 50 años de legislación ambiental

El Gobierno de Trump revirtió este viernes décadas de una ley ambiental de larga data que protegía a las especies en peligro de extinción, abriendo hábitats sensibles de esas especies protegidas a la perforación, la minería, la agricultura y el desarrollo inmobiliario.El cambio, finalizado por los Departamentos del Interior y de Comercio, redefine qué constituye “daño” a las especies en peligro de extinción y a sus hábitats bajo la Ley de Especies en Peligro de Extinción (ESA, por sus siglas en inglés) de 1973. Esa ley había prohibido durante años la “modificación o degradación del hábitat” porque podía dañar o matar a animales en peligro al afectar su capacidad para reproducirse y encontrar alimento o refugio. Esa definición de daño fue ratificada por la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos en un fallo de 1995.El Gobierno de Trump calificó la definición anterior de daño como “obsoleta” en un comunicado emitido este viernes, al argumentar que su medida “devuelve la interpretación de la ESA a su texto real y a su intención original, lo que pondrá fin a años de extralimitación federal”.El secretario del Interior, Doug Burgum, dijo en un comunicado que el enfoque de la ley había “convertido la actividad rutinaria en una trampa regulatoria, elevó los costos que afectaron la vida de las personas y amplió la autoridad federal más allá de lo que el Congreso pretendía”.“Durante años, las agencias federales abusaron de la ESA para obstaculizar el uso legal de la tierra y perjudicar a las familias y empresas estadounidenses”, añadió Burgum, al calificar la acción del Gobierno como una medida de “sentido común” que “sigue el estatuto que el Congreso realmente aprobó”.El secretario de Comercio, Howard Lutnick, añadió en un comunicado que la nueva norma beneficiaría a los pescadores que sufrieron “regulaciones excesivamente amplias y onerosas”.Un funcionario del Departamento del Interior dijo que la norma se publicará en el Registro Federal a principios de la próxima semana.Grupos ambientalistas denunciaron la medida y dijeron que planeaban impugnar el cambio en los tribunales de manera inminente.“Por primera vez, un Gobierno presidencial afirma que las especies protegidas por la Ley de Especies en Peligro de Extinción no deberían estar a salvo de la modificación del hábitat que destruye donde viven, crían a sus crías o buscan alimento”, dijo en un comunicado la abogada de Earthjustice Kristen Boyles. “No hay respaldo para la norma del Gobierno de Trump: no hay respaldo científico, no hay respaldo legal, no hay respaldo público”.Los Departamentos del Interior y de Comercio insistieron en que aún se aplicarían protecciones “centrales” más limitadas para las especies en peligro, y añadieron que su definición de esa ley ambiental fundamental impediría “acciones que lesionen o maten directamente a la fauna silvestre incluida en la lista”.Sin embargo, los grupos ambientalistas impugnarán esa definición más estrecha, al señalar el caso de la Corte Suprema de 1995, que ratificó la definición más amplia de daño, incluida la destrucción del hábitat. Pero si las impugnaciones legales a la reversión del Gobierno de Trump llegan nuevamente a la Corte Suprema, los ambientalistas se enfrentarán a un tribunal mucho más conservador.“La pérdida de hábitat es la causa número uno de extinción”, dijo en un comunicado Gib Brogan, director senior de campañas en Oceana. “Cuando se eliminan las protecciones del hábitat, se elimina una de las salvaguardas más importantes de la ley”.El Gobierno de Trump ha intentado recortar la Ley de Especies en Peligro de Extinción a lo largo del primer y segundo mandato del presidente Donald Trump, con distintos niveles de éxito.A principios de este año, varios altos funcionarios de Trump, incluido Burgum, votaron para desmantelar regulaciones de larga data de la Ley de Especies en Peligro de Extinción en el golfo de México para la críticamente amenazada ballena de Rice, al eximir toda la perforación de petróleo y gas de la ley federal.Y el año pasado, los Departamentos del Interior y de Comercio propusieron restablecer normas del primer Gobierno de Trump que eliminaron salvaguardas para plantas y animales amenazados por el desarrollo humano y por el calentamiento del planeta. No obstante, algunos de esos cambios fueron anulados recientemente en un tribunal federal.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story