Comments on: Old planes need love

By: CDR K.B. Sherman (Ret.)

CDR K.B. Sherman (Ret.) — Wed, 30 May 2007 13:48:00 +0000

I find it unlikely that the P-8 will be built in significant numbers.
http://navlog.org/budget_churn.html

By: CDR. Alex, (Ret)

CDR. Alex, (Ret) — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 23:08:55 +0000

For a short period of time, I was a Production Test Pilot, NAVAIRSYSCOM,REP, BURBANK and Engineering Officer.I had also been assigned to two ASW squadrons. I could never see a 737 as an ASW airframe. Why the Navy did not keep the Orion airframe kept instead of the 737 I will never understand.
Lockheed has all of the ASW experience the Boeing will need years to come up with.

By: William

William — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 00:15:53 +0000

I think the U.S.Navy is making a very big mistake retireing the P-3C up dates! The 737–700 is a nice passenger plane, but as far as being an ASW aircraft, it fall’s short of the ASW mission! It’s to big.,which it will make it a fine target for a SAM, or bogie! It’s fuel consumption will probably be three times that of the P-3C. I just think the Navy is making a big mistake with the P-8 Posident! They should stick with the P-3C Up dates. If it isn’t broke, Don’t fix it!!! Bigger isn’t always better! I am a tax payer just like all you other guys & gals, and I think the P-8 is a waste of tax payers money,Period!
I think the U.S.Navy could go to Lockheed, and tell them what modifications they want on the P-3, and I’m sure Lockheed could make it so. They could come out with a brand new “D” model of the P-3., instead of an Update IV! Retire all the old P-3’s, and buy all new P-3’s, with all new gear. I’m sure it will cost a whole lot less than buying a fleet of new 737’s.
Any comments are welcome on this posting
Sincerely
William

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Sun, 27 Nov 2005 20:35:45 +0000

Good Afternoon Sean,
I think we are drifting off subject here, Noah I don’t think likes that, but I do agree with your observations regarding ASW. Along with mine and counter mine warfare the U.S. Navy has let it leadership slip.
The fact that at least seventy five countries now have a submarine force, are looking to have one or like in the cases of India Brazil, Pakistan and Iran are looking to get into the submarine construction business, ASW should have a higher priority for the U.S.N.
The development in Iraq and Afghanistan of IED’s should also give a heads up the the U.S. Navy that the technology being developed by the terrorist in this area could be adapted with out much effort to the maritime battlespace. This should serve as a “U.S.S. Stark” reality check.
Perhaps in the near future there sublects will be put up for dicussion on Defense Tech.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

By: Sean Dinneen

Sean Dinneen — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:01:06 +0000

The P-3C with all its updates has become a jack of all trades and a master of many. However, in the ASW community, the Navy has thrown away as valueable an asset in the S-3. With subs becomming quieter/stealthy,and many being purchased by nations not friendly to the United States, envision this, a Super Carrier burning/listing after being successfully attacked by a quiet diesel AIP enemy submarine. Will the Admirals of Navy Air then ask themselves, why did we rely on SH-60’s and not update or purchase a new ASW carrier airframe? Will congress ask why the Navy didn’t build another class of sub hunting Destroyers or Frigates?

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:26:49 +0000

Good Morning David,
I’m in some what of agreement with you on the ASW mission, although the Navy might not be in agreement with us.
If I recall with in the Carrier Battle Group the airborne ASW platform is now the SH-60 since the S-3 has been retired.
Although at the end the S-3 was used mostly as an Armed Maritime Patrol platform it was still a robust long range ASW platform that the carrier Battle Group had at it’s disposal, that I hope will not in the future be missed.
The Navy’s lead research platform for ASW, the SS Dolphin which has been out of service since an at sea accident since 2002 is just now, like in today going back into service. It appears that the U.S.N. has some catching up to do on the ASW learning curve.
With the U.S.Navy now dividing up the world in thirds Blue, Green and Brown waters and the fact that Diesel Submarine Technology is developing at a rapid rate with declineing costs the United States Navy might want to rethink it’s ASW programs.
Again though I think the “Orion” is the poster child for replacement of manned airborn platforms with UAV’s.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
PS The article on the SS Dolphin can be found in todays “San Diego Union Tribune” in the B section for anyone who is interested in this topic.

By: Dave G.

Dave G. — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:34:25 +0000

I cannot see a 737 as an ASW Platform. NO WAY. Does the DOD actually think this aircraft will be able to stay on station nearly as long as the P3?

By: David Axe

David Axe — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:56:43 +0000

Byron,
You’re right. The Navy will replace some old P-3s with the new BAMS UAV, which might end up looking like a marinized Global Hawk. BAMS will do persistent surveillance. But the P-8 is still needed for ASW, since the mission requires extreme flexibility and a lot of decision-making that even the most sophisticated UAVs are incapable of.

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:23:48 +0000

Good Morning David and all,
The P-3 Orion seems to be a good platform to be replaced by an UAV. The air frame is getting old and well used, high maintence requirements and in all the P-3’s configurations a rather large crew is required who have to fly long, boring and tedious missions. As well as sometimes being dangerious as we saw with the capture of a PE-3 Orion a few years ago by China.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

By: Steve Cruz

Steve Cruz — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:43:06 +0000

This article brings back memories of the time I spent in the Navy Reserve as a powerplant mechanic working primarily on P-3 aircraft. As far as spying is concerned, here’s what I have to say: Call it anything you want, but the fact is the ability of the U.S. to monitor other nations’ military capabilities through the use of platforms such as the P-3 is what gives us the edge. I have no doubt that countries like China are trying to advance their military capabilities by whatever means they can. History repeats itself. Let’s not forget what happened in World Wars I & II.