Navy's P-8 A Dud?

The Nav Log ^ | 1/31/13 | asa663

[pabianice]

Report: Navy's P-8 Aircraft Plagued with Problems; Deployment in Doubt

(c) asa663@verizon.net

Received from a former P-3 crewmate. It would appear that there are some serious development problems with the new P-8 aircraft.

Here is some input from a friend, USN Retired, who is working for a defense contractor who has a contract with both P-3 and P-8 development. He is working with the P3 but has a LOT of input from the P-8 part of the company. Three cases in point about the waste of our defense establishment.

Sonobouy launching: The P-8 can’t launch sonobouys at any high speed. The aircraft has to slow down to a very (below P-3 speed) to launch sonobouys. The precludes open ocean search from high altitude due to the speed. The aircraft has a very sophisticated launch package that fires the sonobouys straight down which causes them to angle aft in the slip stream and hang up in the tube. Still not resolved. [This is utterly brain-dead; not accounting for a sonobouy's ballistic launch -- Ed.]

Sonobuoy launching: To launch the bouys, the Navy and Boeing decided it needed a very high pressure air expulsion system. Thus there is a tank at about 6000 PSI to achieve the launch of a series of bouys. Great, EXCEPT that Boeing installed quite a SMALL reservoir which means it has to be recharged fairly often. The compressor chosen is small which means that it takes 2-3 hours to recharge the reservoir. Those assessing survivability pointed out that a single round to the reservoir, while the A/C is on the ground, would blow up the whole aft section of the A/C. So . . . now the recommendation is that the reservoir be discharged while the A/C is on the ground. Whoops. To recharge the reservoir with the small compressor would take 8 hours. Sooo now there is a suggestion that to quickly recharge that 6000 PSI reservoir that bleed air from the engine be used to quickly do the recharge!!!. Imagine all the extra plumbing and valves to do that.

Ocean surveillance: For years ALL merchant ships have had to have a transponder giving their name, location, port of call, cargo, etc. P-3's have had a receiver on board for years able to receive this information. If you have a private craft and wish to be able to know what ships are around you it is possible to buy a receiver for about 5,000 dollars which has extensive decoding capability. The P-8 does NOT have such a receiver. The Navy apparently failed to specify that such a devise was required to be in the electronics package. Now the Navy is asking for such a receiver, called ASI, to be included. Boeing says to add another receiver would cost, are you ready for this, $60 Million!!!!! This is their cost to do all the drawings and run all the cables, etc.!!!

So, between the Navy screwing up and Boeing milking the cash cow, we have a P-8 that basically cannot drop sonobouys [a major component of ASW] and unable to monitor merchant shipping, a major component of ocean surveillance.

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK.

This confirms/details the "problems" suggested by a retired Pax River engineer (Contractor) at a social gathering. He particularly noted low level performance/on station time. He blamed the [inappropriate?] choice of the Boeing on Navy brass who wanted a "real jet plane" in lieu of the turbo prop. (Can you spell "S-3 Viking?") That claim may or not be a reflection of the process. I thought he might be biased against Boeing as a Lockheed guy ... but he apparently understated the situation (he didn't want to talk too much in negative terms to me . . a guy he had just met)

BTW, the term "system bugs" in the Subject line seems like a SERIOUS understatement. You don't work the "bugs" out of low level on-station time measured in minutes due to fuel temperature. That is not a software "fix."

No details of the other "weather, take-off, and flight envelope restrictions" which do not sound trivial Remaining aircraft weather, take-off, and flight envelope restrictions should not significantly affect mission operations and are on track for resolution prior to P-8A operational deployment.

[Darksheare]

The P-3 had sonobuoy tubes that were angled aft so that the airstream would assist in pulling the thing out of the tube.
Wonder what the name of the genius was that decided a fast aircraft didn’t need angled tubes.

[TalonDJ]

You mean a brand new plane is not as one that has been in service for 50 years? I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell ya! What do you MEAN engineers don’t always get it right the first time? Off with their heads!

[Darksheare]

Considering the P-8 is a faster plane, they should have taken into consideration the slipstream.
The designers of the P-3 did.
*snort*

[Truth29]

There is an old movie that contains a scene where a defense contractor, when his defective system is unmasked, rails that it didn’t matter that it didn’t work; what mattered was the lucrative contract terms including follow on maintenance and upgrades.

[grobdriver]

The P-3 had sonobuoy tubes that were angled aft so that the airstream would assist in pulling the thing out of the tube.

Actually, the tubes were angled aft so that at a predetermined airspeed from a pre-determine height AGL (AGW?), the sonobuoy would land in the same spot where it was deployed. The way those things shot out of the tube, they didn't need airstream assist.

This is important in a submarine prosecution where you might have two DIFAR buoys indicating a target position and you wanted to drop a pinger on top - or even just another LOFAR to verify the contact before a MAD run.

To the article, the small size of the air bottle is doubly stupid because the TACCO will usually be punching out buoys every minute or so (or less) to establish a line. To be a single shot makes no sense.

I'm not surprised the P-8 is screwed up. I've had bad feelings about this concept since I first heard of it. It's just another example of non-players doing the designing, IMHO.

[CodeToad]

Boeing, run by the MBA/PMP crowd with zero experience in the programs they manage. They literally hire people with an MBA and a PMP certificate that has no knowledge of aviation, electronics, computers, software, military systems, etc. and put them in charge of making critical decisions they know nothing about. Boeing looks down on engineers as “techies” and the MBA/PMP crowd does their best never to hire an engineer within their ranks as to not make themselves look bad by comparison.

This is the same Boeing that a few years ago spent millions of dollars gathering the chief executives from around the word into one room just so some big fat black racist woman could lecture them on ensuring they hire more blacks and then distributing a video of that racist tongue lashing to all employees as a mandatory training film at a cost of even more millions of dollars.

[null and void]

No problem. Totally redesign the sonobuoys so that they can all be released at high altitude on a slow pass.

Give them pop out wings and GPS guidance. You can put them in any array you want.

They could spread out into a geometrically exact arrangement perfect for ideal detection, after only an hour or so of gliding and maneuvering.

Piece of cake.

I bet I could do the whole project for under a billion...

[grobdriver]

I bet I could do the whole project for under a billion

Heh.
You should submit a bid.

[Mouton]

About time to hold those responsible accountable. I think a firing squad is in order. Properly motivated, one would be surprised at the results that can be achieved.

I recall hearing long ago that NASA one time spent millions to develop a pen that would work in zero grav. Rusians used a pencil instead.

[Darksheare]

LOL, but then you’d also have to figure in overhead and glitches that devour whole towns.

[pabianice]

The P-8 has no MAD. It is designed to fly at high altitude to save fuel. Sono drops from 20,000 feet? Morons. Yes, Boeing has no idea what it is doing.

[Oztrich Boy]

The P-3 had sonobuoy tubes that were angled aft so that the airstream would assist in pulling the thing out of the tube.
Wonder what the name of the genius was that decided a fast aircraft didn’t need angled tubes.

Actually it necessarily doesn't. This pat.app. explains it.

It's launching from the Sonobouy Launch Container that is the problem. That powerful blast of compressed air just blows the bottom seal clear. The Sonobouy has to make its own way out by gravity (with slipstream assist in the case of the P-3)

The other way is used by the BAe Nimrod

(biggest mistake the BritDef ever made abandoning it)

Sonobouys are stored internally

crewman loads bare sonobouys into revolver launcher

Bouys are ejected vertically under positive pressure through close fitting tubes

System worked since the 60s

[USAF80]

The Japanese already have their P3 replacement flying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_P-1

they could not wait while the US was messing around. I’m pretty sure theirs could launch sonobuoys with no problems.

The JASDF is the second largest users of the P3 aircraft. They learned their lesson in the Pacific war where a handful of US subs did a lot of damage to their merchant fleet.

[pabianice]

The P-8 is designed to carry torpedo glide bombs; they glide down to the target from 20,000 feet, controlled from onboard the aircraft. This is right up there with the BAMS UCAV, also to be controlled from aboard the P-8. There is no money for BAMS, either. 108 P-8s (down from 156) are supposed to use BAMS to equal the former P-3 fleet of 456 aircraft.

[Darksheare]

Ah yes, the British Nimrod.
Started out as the Air Comet.
Idiocy and budgetary squabbling killed it.
And the replacement as well if memory serves?

Sounds like the techs for the P-8 could learn something from the system the Nim used.

[ArrogantBustard]

I recall hearing long ago that NASA one time spent millions to develop a pen that would work in zero grav.

Yes, you probably did hear that. Long ago.

It makes for great leftist propaganda.

It's also FALSE.

Do some research ... the internet is your friend.

[USAF80]

So that means another contract award to make a gliding torpedo?

[USAF80]

We did spend millions on uniforms that don’t work in the desert.

[Oztrich Boy]

The P-8 has no MAD. It is designed to fly at high altitude to save fuel. Sono drops from 20,000 feet? Morons. Yes, Boeing has no idea what it is doing.

In this case you can't blame Boeing. They gave it MAD. NAVAIR told them to take it out to save weight. If the customer really wants it, it can be fitted