Skip to comments.Poseidon on the prowl (Boeing P-8A)
Posted on 02/29/2012 7:27:20 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
Poseidon on the prowl
P-8A crew successfully hunts undersea targets
Soon to begin joining the fleets anti-submarine warfare (ASW) force is the Navys newest multi-mission platform, the P-8A Poseidon, which recently flew four successful operational missions Feb. 20-24 against submarines that did their best to elude the aircraft during a single-plane detachment to NAS Jacksonville.
ASW is an enabling mission for the Navy to combat challenges posed by new generations of very quiet nuclear and non-nuclear submarines.
VX-1 Test Pilot Cmdr. John Verniest is the P-8A operational test director and NATOPS program manager at NAS Patuxent River, Md. During our weeklong detachment at NAS Jax we conducted four ASW missions and flew more than 30 hours to see how well our P-8A aircraft and mission systems performed in an operational environment against real-world submarines, Verniest said.
What we learned from this det will be helpful in our upcoming operational test readiness review to assess the maturity of the aircraft and its systems in preparation for our initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) later this year.
He explained that the submarine force was informed that the P-8A would be on station at certain times in an attempt to detect and track them. Naturally, Sailors of the silent service did not want to be detected.
For each mission, with flights ranging from six to almost nine hours and averaging four hours on station, the Poseidon combat aircrew located a real target (submarine) somewhere off the east coast and tracked it throughout the on-station period.
(Excerpt) Read more at jacksonville.com ...
Photo by Clark Pierce
A Boeing P-8A Poseidon assigned to VX-1 recently took part in an operational anti-submarine warfare mission from NAS Jacksonville to an area off the east coast.
The P-3 flies 14+ hours missions with lots of loiter. The fly at 300ft above the waterline when they should. If they lose 1 of 4 engines, they continue the mission when this 737 wanna-be has to come home over a fluid leak.
The VP squadrons worldwide would rather see all new L-188 Electra aircraft but the assh)les in DC wanted to go "new".
What they don't realize is that when you find perfection, stop.
Now, the PILOTS like the 737...for obvious reasons. They're looking for their mandatory 1500 hrs to go commercial.
the thing is, if we can detect our subs, so can other advanced nations. at least we have to assume they can to some extent.
Agreed. That does NOT look like the bird for the job.
I’m working the roll out on the P-8A. Wish I could tell you all about it, but that wouldn’t be too wise.
I disagree... The P-8A can get to it’s target area quicker and has more range with mid-air refueling which the P3 can’t do. With the modern avionics and gizmos it won’t need to loiter 300ft above the water giving away it’s position...
Guess you have said enough!! This seems to be one program which has progressed without serious glitches or delays.
How sweet, don’t they look proud?
The P-3 is a better airplane than this will ever be.
Anyone know which airframe that weapon is built on....possibly a 757 or something?
Too late, I noticed that Reply #3 says it’s a 737. Looks longer than a 737, on which I’ve flown Southwest frequently. Could be, though. As they say in Japan:
Went to the Boeing P-8a website and learned that it is a 737, but not a standard one. It’s a lash-up of parts from several iterations of 737:
“The P-8A is the latest military derivative aircraft to benefit from a culture of technical innovation and the One Boeing approach to manufacturing (see In Line Production video). The P-8A is a derivative of the highly successful and reliable Next-Generation 737. The P-8A has the fuselage of a 737-800 and the wings of a 737-900. Modifications to the baseline commercial aircraft are incorporated into the aircraft in-line. In the past, commercial aircraft were sent to modification centers where they were taken apart and rebuilt to meet military specifications. The P-8A is Boeing’s first military derivative aircraft to incorporate structural modifications to the aircraft as it moves through the commercial line.”
I wonder why they didn’t install winglets? They’re proven for better fuel economy/range and take-off and landing performance.
Why not UAV’s doing this task?..
With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, and end of the Cold War, P-3 operations at Lajes declined, and the Naval Air Facility was inactivated in the late 1990s.It's sad how things just pass you by when you're not looking.
I have never understood why the military version of the Electra was so much better than the civilian version. I had one occassion to fly on an Electra, back in 1961 (yeah, the Electra is THAT old)from Tampa to New Orleans. It vibrated so badly on takeoff and landing that it felt like it was going to fall apart.
I had been on leave and when I reported back, I found out that one of my felllow Marines from Chicago had been killed when his Electra sucked bird(s) into an engine and the whole plane fell apart. It was EXACTLY at the same moment I was landing in New Orleans!
After that, I would deliberately avoid flying on an Electra, even if it meant long layovers.
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.
Primarily because the P-3 was an entirely, and I mean completely new aircraft.
The wing carry-through structure (the bits that hold the wings to the fuselage) on the original/civilian version had a wee tiny little defect.
Certain combinations of power settings set up vibrations that caused the bird to lose wings.
IIRC, Braniff Airlines had two flights get turned into lawn darts that way, which killed a bunch of people, then put the airline out of business and left Lockheed with a very, very serious black eye. (Engineering schools still use Lockheed as a case study in proper application of computer simulations in lieu of actual flight testing and the number of cases those simulations should include; Lockheed simply didn't look at enough data points and missed the one that broke things and killed people.)
Good news: They learned from this FU, then rebuilt and sold what became the P-3, which is a very, very good bird.
P-8, LCS, DDG-1000, all dead on arrival. BAMS? Ain't gonna happen.
IIRC ....the Electra had vibration fatigue, and part of the problem was the engines were synchronized together (not a good thing.)
It was built before it was possible to do computer simulations. The big thing was that the Electra failures led to the development of studies about very high number of very low stress cycles - cyclic fatigue.
Some of the Electra’s had the disconcerting problem with a wing falling off ....but one plane flying in the Boston area lost both wings!!
It has better than winglets. Raked wingtips will always be a better choice over blended winglets. Raked wingtips have to be designed in from the basic wing design. Blended wingtips are if you are retrofitting an existing design. P8 wings are new, so the raked wingtips are designed in from begining. 737 wings are legacy design thus winglets are the answer. Raked wingtips perform better in general.
That’s very interesting, thank you. I haven’t seen a planform view of the wing, I’ll look it up, though.
In June 2005, Boeing announced that the design of the P-8A's wingtips has been changed from the blended winglet to a backswept wingtip. In June 2006, Stork Aerospace of the Netherlands was awarded the contract for manufacture of the backswept (or raked) wingtips.