# Pelosi's Palatial Plane Preference: Piggishness or Republican Pablam? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 8, 2007, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385 "2007-02-08T18:40:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/41 "2007-02-09T03:03:39Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] So we should ask the SAT what changed with the new speaker. [/QUOTE] Sure. Give him a call. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/42 "2007-02-09T03:33:46Z")
> [@](#): > > **John Mace** : Hillary tried to make a joke about her husband (apparently) and it backfired with the reporters. No one “pushed” those stories anywhere. **John** , you really have this one wrong. I don’t know how the reporters handled the story, but it didn’t backfire on Hillary and she didn’t “try” to make a joke. She was hilarious! I don’t know if it was intentional or not, but she delivered one of the most _humanizing_ lines that she could have. For at least a little while, she was one of us and I think she knew it. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/43 "2007-02-09T03:38:42Z")
Working range vs max range - An aircraft on an IFR flight plan (which Pelosi’s would always be) must have fuel to reach its destination, execute a missed approach, fly to the nearest alternate, and land with at least 30 minutes of fuel left. From Elvis’s cite, the Gulfstream III has a max range of 3715 nautical miles, while maintaining proper IFR reserves. That’s with a max fuel load. [This cite](http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-20.htm) says the C20 has a max range of 4700 miles - but that might be the Gulfstream IV variant. In any event, either of those two planes can easily make the trip. My understanding, however, is that it’s not the range that’s actually the issue, but size - Pelosi has apparently requested a plane big enough to carry her staff, immediate family, and her California congressional delegation, all of which requires 42 seats. The C20 only has 14. The C-32 (modified Boeing 757) is the only aircraft in the 89th airlift wing (the one responsible for hauling around Washington politicians) which is both big enough and has the required range. I’m not taking a position on this - there could be lots of reasons we’re not privy to for all this. Perhaps the C-20 doesn’t have the electronics that would be required if Pelosi had to assume the Presidency from the air. Or perhaps it’s so loaded down with various avoinics, countermeasures, and other equipment that it can’t fly with a full fuel load. Or maybe Pelosi is just flexing her muscle and trying to grab up a big perk that is valuable to her - being able to fly people around with you is a good way to get them on your side, and it’s a great perk to offer California legislators when you want to twist their arm. But really, I have no clue what’s really going on here. Factual answer: At least on paper, the C-20 is more than capable of making the flight home from Washington with plenty of reserves. However, my understanding is that the real issue is a bit more subtle - the Air Force is saying that she will have the same kind of access other VIPs do, which means she’d get one of the planes out of the pool, and that plane may or may not be able to make the trip non-stop. So it’s not specifically about the C-20, but about the fact that she just might be put on a plane that has to refuel along the way. For the record, the Bush White House came down on Pelosi’s side. Tony Snow said today that the speaker had requested nothing inappropriate, and the issue was being blown way out of proportion. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/44 "2007-02-09T03:43:38Z")
> [@](#): > > If that is the case, the Reps are indeed the douches and the offenders should have thier faces rubbed in it in an attempt to prevent them from stirring similar shit the next time. You’re kidding, right? There is nothing that a right-winger can say—no slur so offensive, no allegation so baseless–to make him lose credibility, or to keep him from being invited back to the talking head shows. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/45 "2007-02-09T03:44:28Z")
I also got a “just between us gals” vibe out of it. It didn’t seem to “backfire” with her audience, so I got to wonder if maybe the reporters with whom it “backfired” might not have been predominantly men? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/46 "2007-02-09T03:46:05Z")
[QUOTE=Lissa] I am not a pilot, nor an expert, but i have heard that most pilots consider their fuel limit at half the amount it takes. This accounts for delays in landing, redirections and emergencies. Once again, this is only something I heard once. [/QUOTE] Sorry, it’s not true. For VFR flight, normal reserves are 45 minutes of air time, and the typical light aircraft might have an endurance before hitting the reserve limit of 3-5 hours. For IFR flight, the reserve requirements are as I mentioned above. Not only that, but in larger aircraft you generally only fuel them for the range you need plus reserves. You don’t carry along lots of extra fuel, because fuel is weight, and weight degrades performance, increases fuel consumption, and generally makes the whole affair more expensive. The C-20 Gulfstream III is a very long range commuter jet. The distance from Washington to San Francisco by air is only 2128 nautical miles. The C20 could almost fly there and divert all the way back to Washington without refueling. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/47 "2007-02-09T04:00:55Z")
Christian Coalition of America Condemns Speaker Pelosi’s Request for Large Air Force Jet to [Transport to San Francisco Political Cronies](http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/651342177.html), Favorite Members of Congress; Relatives and Friends > [@](#): > > Christian Coalition of America condemns the new Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat from San Francisco, for trying to get luxurious travel paid for by the American taxpayers. Is a first class seat on a commercial jet no longer good enough for Speaker Pelosi?.. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/48 "2007-02-09T04:01:58Z")
[QUOTE=DoctorJ] You’re kidding, right? There is nothing that a right-winger can say—no slur so offensive, no allegation so baseless–to make him lose credibility, or to keep him from being invited back to the talking head shows. [/QUOTE] Uhhh…what are you talking about? I think we’re in agreement. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/49 "2007-02-09T04:06:54Z")
[QUOTE=Magiver] So we should ask the SAT what changed with the new speaker. [/QUOTE] About 1800 miles (the difference between Illinois and California from Washington). As the range is also important in an emergency situation, I have the feeling a C 20 would fall short. The thing that the right wing media forgets also is that after 9/11 the House established first with Hastert that the speaker of the House needed the extra security of a military plane. Regarding if her staff and immediate family can fly with Pelosi: > **[Client Challenge](https://www.sfgate.com/gone.txt)** > [@](#): > > A statement from Livingood said that although Hastert used a military jet with a 2,000-mile range, **the House bureaucracy is unsure of the rules for air travel**. For instance, it isn’t clear if Pelosi can carry staff, family or other members of Congress at government expense or whether she could use government planes for political travel. [bolding mine] Ok, I guess then we should check the standards that they used with Hastert, right? > [@](#): > > No information was immediately available about the number of trips Hastert took in military aircraft nor the rules for their usage while he was speaker. Oh right, I forgot, it would not be prudent (or typical for the former Republican congress) to find out what rules were accepted during the Republican congress regarding this item. IMHO it is telling the obvious projection I notice when some critics are saying that Pelosi wants a “Lincoln bedroom in the sky”, implying that Lobbyists would be invited, could it be that the white house defense is coming so strong because they are afraid that the media would ask next what people Hastert invited? ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/50 "2007-02-09T04:15:06Z")
> [@](#): > > Uhhh…what are you talking about? I think we’re in agreement. We’re in agreement that the Republicans pushing this tripe are the douches here. I was scoffing at the idea that if the douches in question “have their faces rubbed in it”, it will “prevent them from stirring similar shit the next time”. Rub all you want; they’ll still stir the same shit the next time, and the media will still take them just as seriously. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/51 "2007-02-09T04:48:30Z")
[QUOTE=GIGObuster] …could it be that the white house defense is coming so strong because they are afraid that the media would ask next what people Hastert invited? [/QUOTE] Funny you should mention that… [http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/LynnSweet/020807.html](http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/LynnSweet/020807.html) > [@](#): > > …When Hastert was under pressure because of the exploding Mark Foley page scandal last October, he ordered an airlift at government expense to fly a lawmaker to Washington for the sole purpose of getting him to a press conference to help bail Hastert out of the jam… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/52 "2007-02-09T06:13:16Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > John, you really have this one wrong. What did I get wrong? The reporters I’ve heard all said it was clear she was talking about Bill, and then she denied it later. I call that a backfire with the reporters. Instead of a joke, it became a news item. Do you think that was what she planned? [QUOTE=elucidator] I also got a “just between us gals” vibe out of it. It didn’t seem to “backfire” with her audience, so I got to wonder if maybe the reporters with whom it “backfired” might not have been predominantly men? [/QUOTE] If you have some evidence that they were mostly men, it would be interesting to see. Otherwise your speculation is just that-- speculation. I saw an interview the next day on Hardball with 2 female and 2 male reporters and they all said it was clear she was talking about Bill, even though she backpedaled on that later saying it was about Osama and Saddam (or whoever). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/53 "2007-02-09T06:18:28Z")
BTW, \*\*Zoe \*\*and **elucidator** … it’s interesting that you zero in on my post about the “backfire” comment but had nothing to say about the real point of my post, which was the incorrect statement by \*\*Apos \*\*that those two stories were “pushed” on the media by the right wing. Care to comment about that? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/54 "2007-02-09T06:43:32Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] …If you have some evidence that they were mostly men, it would be interesting to see. Otherwise your speculation is just that-- speculation… [/QUOTE] That is the most commonly accepted meaning. When one says “I wonder”, it is widely understood to imply conjecture, speculation. As bitter as it is to admit, you’ve certainly got me on that one, **John**. I must freely confess, yes, indeed, that was a speculation. No getting around it, you got me dead to rights. Woe. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/55 "2007-02-09T11:14:41Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Working range vs max range - An aircraft on an IFR flight plan (which Pelosi’s would always be) must have fuel to reach its destination, execute a missed approach, fly to the nearest alternate, and land with at least 30 minutes of fuel left. [/QUOTE] Uh… Sam… not to nitpick… My FAR/AIM says 30 minutes reserve for daytime VFR, 45 for night VFR and IFR. Did you get the two switched around? Anyhow - even aside from “adequate reserves” (and for these flights the air force/government may have higher requirements than the FAA) there are factor other than just maximum range to consider here, as Sam and others have pointed out. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/56 "2007-02-09T12:05:49Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] I’m not taking a position on this - there could be lots of reasons we’re not privy to for all this. Perhaps the C-20 doesn’t have the electronics that would be required if Pelosi had to assume the Presidency from the air. Or perhaps it’s so loaded down with various avoinics, countermeasures, and other equipment that it can’t fly with a full fuel load. Or maybe Pelosi is just flexing her muscle and trying to grab up a big perk that is valuable to her - being able to fly people around with you is a good way to get them on your side, and it’s a great perk to offer California legislators when you want to twist their arm. But really, I have no clue what’s really going on here. [/quote] From the article I linked to before: > [@](#): > > The guidelines provided by the Pentagon say Pelosi could be accompanied by family members, provided they pay the government coach fare. The plane could not be used for travel to political events. Members of Congress could accompany her on the plane if the travel is cleared by the House ethics committee. It looks as if these guidelines are already in place. > [@](#): > > Factual answer: At least on paper, the C-20 is more than capable of making the flight home from Washington with plenty of reserves. However, my understanding is that the real issue is a bit more subtle - the Air Force is saying that she will have the same kind of access other VIPs do, which means she’d get one of the planes out of the pool, and that plane may or may not be able to make the trip non-stop. So it’s not specifically about the C-20, but about the fact that she just might be put on a plane that has to refuel along the way. And the Speaker said that she’d rather go commercial in that case, which seems legit to me, and the Sergeant-at-arms said that they’d need to get a plane that could make it the whole way. Again from the article: > [@](#): > > Pelosi said she would be happy to fly on commercial airliners but said the House sergeant-at-arms office urged her to continue Hastert’s practice of using Air Force transport. She said she was informed on her first trip home that her plane would not make it across the country. **Sam** , your speculation that the C-20 can make it across the country is interesting, but assuming she was actually told that it would not, I’m guessing whoever told her that has information superior to yours. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/57 "2007-02-09T12:24:34Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Sorry, it’s not true. For VFR flight, normal reserves are 45 minutes of air time, and the typical light aircraft might have an endurance before hitting the reserve limit of 3-5 hours. For IFR flight, the reserve requirements are as I mentioned above. Not only that, but in larger aircraft you generally only fuel them for the range you need plus reserves. You don’t carry along lots of extra fuel, because fuel is weight, and weight degrades performance, increases fuel consumption, and generally makes the whole affair more expensive. The C-20 Gulfstream III is a very long range commuter jet. The distance from Washington to San Francisco by air is only 2128 nautical miles. The C20 could almost fly there and divert all the way back to Washington without refueling. [/QUOTE] Ok, thanks Sam. ---
**Author:** ![Martiju](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@Martiju](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martiju)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/58 "2007-02-09T14:14:04Z")
[QUOTE=Bill Door] I know that when I flew on the corporate jet from Cincinnati to Brussels I noted to the pilot that the published range of the jet (a Falcon 900 EX) was only 150 miles more than the distance between the two airports. The pilot guaranteed that we had enough fuel to reach **the crash site**. [/QUOTE] My bolding. I thought all planes, once they leave the ground, had enough fuel (or energy at least) to reach the crash site…! [QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] This whole thing stank when it hit the press in the first place. I really, really wish we weren’t living in a society so in need of smears and scandals to keep us interested in “news.” [/QUOTE] That damn lib’rul media we keep hearing so much about…!! ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/59 "2007-02-09T15:14:49Z")
Here’s the Republican National Committee on \*\*Pelosi’s Power Trip: [“Non-Stop” Nancy Seeks Flight Of Fancy](http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=6788). \*\* I see that their research capabilities have not improved since the [Days of Douglas Feith](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802387.html). ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2007, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385/60 "2007-02-09T16:10:04Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] My understanding, however, is that it’s not the range that’s actually the issue, but size - Pelosi has apparently requested a plane big enough to carry her staff, immediate family, and her California congressional delegation, all of which requires 42 seats. The C20 only has 14. [/QUOTE] Can you back up your understanding with a cite? I thought this had already been debunked. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pelosis-palatial-plane-preference-piggishness-or-republican-pablam/391385.md?page=4)