[raverbashing]

> Do you think it's possible that Air Force One Pilots are instructed to land at unconventional spots on the runway to foil potential threats?

No. It's hard enough to nail a landing to pick the "right spot" especially when you don't need it

If there's a threat on ground the best thing you can do is stay on air, not try to land on a different spot of the same runway (but yes, given some types of obstructions you can try to use only part of the runway, I'm not sure if they prefer you landing after it or in front of it, but I think the latter makes more sense - depending on the type and position of obstruction of course)

[heyflyguy]

I politely disagree with you. Landings in an aircraft that you have flown for any length of time are not all that hard. In many cases I have been in aircraft that "land long" so as to not have to taxi 3 miles (literally) to get to the gate or parking area.

I would imagine there is a bit of risk mitigation with AF1 as it relates to taxiing on the ground. As you state (correctly I surmise) the best place for AF1 to be is in the air. The worst, is unprotected on the ground. The secret service is great, but I don't see them clearing a mile of taxiway in multiple directions for the safety of the aircraft.

Best to land long, turn off at taxiway and be at your destination with proper equipment nearby as soon as possible.

[raverbashing]

Thanks for your answer, you probably know more than me about the subject :)

But yes, I understand that you might want to land closer to the beginning or the end of the runway and that's easier the longer the runway is.

And if your taxi back was 3Mi, yeah, it was a long runway. Now, in something like 5000ft/1500m runway, you'll just want to touch down early and hit the brakes as soon as possible (not that the VC-25 should be landing at anything that short in a non-emergency setting)