Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Head of US Navy’s Air Patrol and Recon Confirms Developments
The Nav Log ^ | 11/25/08 | litton51@hotmail.com

Posted on 11/25/2008 11:58:16 AM PST by pabianice

RADM Michael L. Holmes, Commander, Patrol and Reconnaissance Group, recently gave an interview to Seapower Magazine regarding the future of the US Navy’s Patrol and Reconnaissance squadrons. Holmes is responsible to the commander, Naval Air Forces, for manning, training and equipping the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Force of seventeen patrol, special projects patrol, and fleet air reconnaissance squadrons. In his interview Holmes confirmed Navy planning despite an ever more threatened budget as detailed here in The Nav Log, and offered additional details.

Holmes noted that, while the P-8 is fully funded through 2013, “It can’t come a minute too soon, given the problems we’ve got with the old P-3.” He noted that there will have to be less than the current 12 VP squadrons (the Nav Log is predicting six plus the FRS). The EP-3E will not be replaced by a P-8 derivative, but rather, with the joint Army-Navy Aerial Common Sensor platform that has been having fits and starts since the EMB-145 was rejected as inadequate. Unmanned vehicles -- Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) -- will, indeed, replace the lion’s share of long-range surveillance for both anti-submarine warfare and electronic intelligence. ASW itself will remain VP’s core mission despite patrol aviation now spending most of its time over land in support of the war on terror. And Holmes insists that the P-8 will not be replaced any time soon with a UAV because of the complexity of VP missions and the aircraft’s requirement to carry a large load of ordnance.

Holmes expanded upon new ways of doing the job. These include use of the new Mk54 lightweight torpedo, which will be delivered from high altitude as a modified glide bomb to both keep the aircraft from detection as well as to save on airframe wear at low altitudes. OPNAV (the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations) is trying to find the money to fund a high-altitude torpedo to drop from 20,000 feet. The Navy is also at work making sonobuoys with GPS, allowing instant location of a contact. Also in the works is a real-time link between the bouy’s GPS location and the torpedo’s guidance. Sonobouys will also be active, for the most part, because passive detection of a 4th generation diesel-electric sub on batteries is nearly impossible.

With a new Congress already bragging about cutting the defense budget “by 25% to start,” how many of these plans become reality is, well, up in the air.

Return to The Nav Log


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dod; holmes; navair; usnavy

1 posted on 11/25/2008 11:58:16 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pabianice
...P-8 is fully funded through 2013, “It can’t come a minute too soon, given the problems we’ve got with the old P-3.”

The P-3 is a workhorse, solid as a rock. The P-8 won't last nearly as long...........

2 posted on 11/25/2008 12:01:13 PM PST by Red Badger (Never has a man risen so far, so fast and is expected to do so much, for so many, with so little...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
With a new Congress already bragging about cutting the defense budget “by 25% to start,”...

Not because the Democrats are interested in saving money, but because they are actively trying to gut the military.

3 posted on 11/25/2008 12:01:47 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Thanks from a quondam squid!


4 posted on 11/25/2008 12:02:42 PM PST by astyanax (If you need to wear a mask while speaking your mind, it is probably best you remain silent...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
With a new Congress already bragging about cutting the defense budget “by 25% to start,”...

Not because the Democrats are interested in saving money, but because they are actively trying to gut the military.

This kind of behavior invites challenges from Russia and China, e.g., plus attacks from terrorists.

5 posted on 11/25/2008 12:05:17 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01

I’ve only heard that 25% quote from Barney Frank. He isn’t exactly Congress.
Has anyone else said that? Or anyone else promote that cut?


6 posted on 11/25/2008 12:13:18 PM PST by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
FYI, several Navy VP newsletters Here and Here.
7 posted on 11/25/2008 12:18:37 PM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: magslinger
Ping!

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)

LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

8 posted on 11/25/2008 12:22:29 PM PST by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01
This kind of behavior invites challenges from Russia and China, e.g., plus attacks from terrorists.

Those are their friends. Conservative, patriotic Americans (you and me) are their enemies.

9 posted on 11/25/2008 12:23:38 PM PST by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
VP Navy!

VP1, '77-'80

10 posted on 11/25/2008 12:33:01 PM PST by grobdriver (Let the embeds check the bodies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

My company that I work for makes “stuff” on the EP-3..............


11 posted on 11/25/2008 12:33:58 PM PST by Red Badger (Never has a man risen so far, so fast and is expected to do so much, for so many, with so little...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; Bean Counter; investigateworld; ...
SONOBUOY PING!

Click on pic for past Navair pings.

Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.

12 posted on 11/25/2008 12:54:15 PM PST by magslinger (What is the fastest growing oppressed minority in America? Hoplophiles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

VP-50 1966 and 1967. Then onto VF-96.


13 posted on 11/25/2008 1:36:10 PM PST by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Thud

ping


14 posted on 11/25/2008 2:15:39 PM PST by Dark Wing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
"The P-3 is a workhorse, solid as a rock. The P-8 won't last nearly as long...........

This jazzed up 737 is going to have all kinds of problems, yup. I'd have felt better if they'd picked the updated Orion design that Lockheed proposed. But what do I know... I still miss the Navy's seaplanes and flying boats.
15 posted on 11/25/2008 6:23:31 PM PST by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
While Bawney Fwank may have been the only one to voice it, do you have any doubt that the Congressional Democrats would love to cut the defense budget by 25%?
16 posted on 11/25/2008 7:00:45 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: okie01

No, not on principal. But they also want their districts to bring home the slice of the Defense contracts. This is why you see them pushing stuff on the Pentagon they don’t want.

I see missile defense getting shredded, and the troop strength slashed, but I would bet the toys still get purchased if they are made in the right places.

But the article said “Congress” and I wanted to know if anyone besides Frank had made that sentiment known. I want to see how far that rot has spread.


17 posted on 11/25/2008 7:05:31 PM PST by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
No, not on principal. But they also want their districts to bring home the slice of the Defense contracts. This is why you see them pushing stuff on the Pentagon they don’t want.

Perceptive assessment. They'll cheer a 25% reduction that focusses on missile defense and active troop strength. But they won't touch anything that equates to pork.

Billions for pork. But not one red cent for national defense!

18 posted on 11/25/2008 7:10:54 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

VP-4 ‘75-’78
VP-17 ‘78-’80
COMPATWINGPAC ‘80-84


19 posted on 11/25/2008 8:08:40 PM PST by tupac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp

For what the P-3’s mission is, and ESPECIALLY the EP-3, they were perfect! They need to be slow and low flying, where a 737 is not really useful...................


20 posted on 11/26/2008 5:16:55 AM PST by Red Badger (Never has a man risen so far, so fast and is expected to do so much, for so many, with so little...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver
VP Navy! VP1, '77-'80

VP-1, 69-72

21 posted on 11/26/2008 7:51:47 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
For what the P-3’s mission is, and ESPECIALLY the EP-3, they were perfect! They need to be slow and low flying, where a 737 is not really useful...................

The P-8 won primarily because of its higher speed during transit to and from the OPAREA. It won secondarily because of the jet jock leadership in naval air. Because it's fuel economy at low levels sucks, the Navy spin is that ASW can be done just fine at 20,000 feet. Bullshit. It has to be with the P-8 and the Navy is scrambling to develop ordnance that can be dropped from high altitude. The tail is wagging the dog. The punchline is that, IMHO, few P-8s will be built, esp. under a commander in chief and congress who hate the military.

22 posted on 11/26/2008 7:56:19 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Somehow I think Boeing had a huge hand in this decision..............But that’s just a guess...........


23 posted on 11/26/2008 8:08:47 AM PST by Red Badger (Never has a man risen so far, so fast and is expected to do so much, for so many, with so little...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Hey, I hate to sound biased, (MAC ‘79-’81) but... seems like a spanking new 130 could be adapted for this mission mosh scose.


24 posted on 11/26/2008 5:06:45 PM PST by Iron head mike (when the dog barks at night i reach for my pistol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Iron head mike
Hey, I hate to sound biased, (MAC ‘79-’81) but... seems like a spanking new 130 could be adapted for this mission mosh scose.

Where would you put the bomb bay?

25 posted on 11/27/2008 6:38:22 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson