As the White House conducts damage control over that controversial “photo op” involving a presidential aircraft, there are indications that the operation was more complex—and costly—than first indicated.
Air Force officials first pegged the operation’s price tag at $328,000, the cost for a VC-25 VIP transport and two F-16s to make an 18-minute, low-level flight over New York City on April 27th. The mission was conducted to allow an Air Force photographer, flying in the backseat of one of the F-16s, to image the VC-25 presidential jet as it passed over the Statue of Liberty.
Bowing to public and media pressure, the Obama Administration released a single photo from the fly-by on Friday, the same day that the Director of the White House Military Office, Louis Caldera, resigned over his role in the flap.
Mr. Caldera stepped down as the administration released an internal review highlighting missed e-mails and phone calls; treatment for a back injury and hallway meetings that led to a breakdown in notifying the public. The low-level appearance of the F-16s and the VC-25--a military version of the Boeing 747 airliner--triggered widespread panic among New Yorkers, who feared another 9-11-style terrorist attack was underway.
But the White House report leaves a number of key questions unanswered. While it identifies Mr. Caldera and Colonel Scott Turner, Commander of the Presidential Airlift Group (PAG), as key figures in the fly-by fiasco, it offers little information on the detailed military coordination required to carry out the mission, and the final cost of the photographic flight.
According to the administration review, planning for the New York photo-op began in March 2009—or possibly earlier. A month later, on April 3rd, representatives of the PAG, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and “several local authorities” met via video teleconference to discuss “operational issues and public affairs/outreach issues.”
During the April meeting, participants concluded that the outreach efforts should be carefully coordinated and timed,” recognizing the sensitivity of the aircraft involved.” While Air Force public affairs and the FAA were prepared to respond to possible media queries, there was (apparently) no concrete plan for informing the public.
The report also suggests that Mr. Caldera was largely out of the loop during much of the planning process. Traveling with President Obama on trips to Europe and the Caribbean, Caldera left much of the preliminary coordination in the hands of his deputy, George Mulligan. The White House claims that Caldera first learned of the planned fly-by on April 20th, only one week before the flight.
While admitting that the discussion may have occurred, Mr. Caldera says he doesn’t recall the conversation and failed to read subsequent e-mails on the project because he was taking pain medication for a bad back.
Still, the seven-page White House assessment doesn’t address other, critical elements of the fly-by operation. It does not identify who first proposed the photo-op, or how it was coordinated through such organizations as the National Guard Bureau, which “owned” the F-16s that escorted the VC-25. Additionally, the report does not specify how a relatively distant guard unit was selected to participate in the operation, despite the presence of ANG F-16 squadrons that are much closer to New York City.
Examiner.com has confirmed that the F-16 that served as the photographic platform deployed from Dannelly Field in Montgomery, Alabama, home of the Air National Guard’s 187th Fighter Wing. Initial reports suggested that both F-16s came from the Washington, D.C. ANG, based at Andrews AFB in suburban Maryland.
But an Air Force spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Tadd Sholtis, said that the Alabama guard was tasked to provide a two-seat F-16 because a similar “D” model from the D.C. unit was unavailable. The F-16D from Alabama deployed to Andrews before the flight.
At the Maryland base, the Alabama pilot was joined by another member of the team, a military photographer from the 1st Combat Camera Squadron at Charleston AFB, South Carolina. The only active-duty photographic unit of its type in the USAF, the Charleston combat camera is charged with acquiring still and visual images in support of various air, sea and ground military operations.
While airborne photographic assignments are routine for combat camera personnel, they are less common for fighter units. So far, the Air Force has not detailed the number of fighter squadrons that have participated in airborne photo-ops, or how they are assigned missions.
Air Force figures indicate that the fighter portion of the mission cost at least $28,000. If each F-16 flying hour costs the government about $8,000, the expenditure was enough for about three and a half hours in the air, enough time to fly from Washington to New York, conduct the photo op, and return.
However, the USAF total does not seem in include flight time between Dannelly Field and Andrews AFB, Maryland, where the photo flight originated. At a speed of 460 kts, an F-16 would require at least 90 minutes to complete the 600-mile trip from Alabama to the Washington, D.C. area, adding another $10,000 to the tab.
Travel costs for the F-16 pilot and the combat camera photographer represent yet another expense that appears to be excluded from the Air Force estimate. Per diem and lodging rates in the Washington area are among the highest in the nation for military travelers; assuming the fighter pilot and the photographer spent at least three days on temporary duty, they would have collected more than $700 in payments for billeting, meals, and incidental expenses.
There is also the matter of images captured during the mission. The single photo released by the White House on Friday represents only a fraction of those taken by the Air Force photographer. During a typical photo mission, a combat camera photographer carries both still and video cameras, recording images and footage with both.
During the 10-minute fly-by, an aerial photographer could record literally hundreds of still photos and extended video segments. The Administration and the Pentagon have not said what will happen to those images.
Also missing from the public record is a manifest of personnel aboard the VC-25, which utilizes the “Air Force One” call sign when the president is onboard. The Pentagon insists that only military personnel were flying on the jet, but it has not released the names of those individuals.
The Defense Department is conducting its own probe into the fly-by, but no details have been released.
Comments
Oh come on, no pro took that picture, and there is no reason the WH would have released such a crappy photo if they had hundreds! No, it was the only one they had - the one that happened to have been taken as a personal momento by the pilot.
Why no other photos? Simply because it was not a photo mission. It was something else, probably a mega-donor jaunt.
Let's be clear. The President has the authority to conduct such jaunts and I am sure they have been done in the past. With that authority comes the obligation to admit it if in hindsight (rememebr that recession?) it looks tone-deaf, or fess up if something goes wrong.
Both happened here... and instead of doing what a leader does and step up to it, Obama did what a demagogue does and lied about it.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!