P8 Posiedon Replaces P3 Orion

[whitewingsrich]

i bet the P-8 will be a gas guzzler aswell. One thing that can be done with the P-3 is have 2 engines shut down & props feathered to preserve fuel & stay on patrol for longer periods. A 737 only having 2 engines any shut down's will cause major yaw problems

[banana1971]

P8s will be used with Broad Area Maritime Surveillance drones (a naval version of Global Hawk) which have a 30 hour station time. If the UAV sees anything during constant surveillance, the Navy can vector a P8 to investigate.

[schwambly]

"Been in service for forty years" doesn't mean that all of the planes are forty years old.

[83rkt]

@schwambly

163295 was the last P-3 built for the navy in the early 90's. I believe VP-69 still has it.

[TheMsdos25]

the usaf would do better to stay with the p-3c. this is just an airliner and would be easy prey for AA or fighters.



[schwambly]

@TheMsdos25 The U.S. Navy's P-3 was also based on the airframe of an airliner.

[centurion180ad]

This is a White Elephant.

This could not be worse of an idea.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to replace a naval 4 engine turboprop, with a wide body airliner with 2 jet engines.

IMPOSSIBLE

[somdguy2001]

Boeing: They put the "POS" in Poseidon.

[charlie29943]

With all due respect Captain, That "Tired Iron" Never let the Fleet Down.Hope your new Bird can hold a candle to the P-3.

[artifushion]

Isn't there a delay from when you use throttle till you get the full power out to the engines?

[starbucks107]

SCREW THAT! WORKING ALL TOGETHER? HOW IS THE SS-3 GOING TO GET ANY SLEEP DAM IT? I DON'T WANT TO LOOK AT THE TACO, NAV, SS-1/ AND THE BOOT SS-2 ALL THE FRIGGING TIME ON STATION.

[metalbird42]

From an old crewmate, congrats on making Captain. I knew you as LCDR Rixley :) a long time ago.

[metalbird42]

For tyrone9009, actually there were two (if I remember correctly) P-3's outfitted with inflight refueling probes, but because of the SALT treaties in existence at the time they were only experimental. We would have exceeded the limits of the treaty for international capable bombers were that included in the standard configuration.

[kayakerguy01]

The P-3 may be tired iron, but I doubt the P-8 will be as dependable in severe weather. I remember flying in major storms around the straits of Gibraltar, when every other aircraft was grounded. The P-3 was in the air, and was actually struck by lightning, in which it melted the nose cone, and blew up the MAD boom, but it didn't effect it's ability to fly. I don't see the P-8 doing that. Jets are much more temperamental.

[scaremengaviation]

@kayakerguy01 Jets have been hit by lightning before, haven't they?

[GtrDudeL]

@kayakerguy01 Ummmm - U couldn't B more wrong. 737's have lost their entire sect 41/43 crown structure and landed safely.... Boooya. As for lightening strikes - all modern apls take lightening strikes w/o incident... cept maybe the old russian ones... lol. Can a P3 take off on one engine? P8 can... CFM56 jet engines R rock solid.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL since p3's have 4 engines let's compare apples with apples... P3's can fly on 2 engines all day long.... Since p8's have 2 engines, cutting one is cutting 50% of it's power so that leaves 2 engines for the p3 and YES it can.... oh.... boooya.... CFM56 enfines may be rock solid but the ENTIRE P3 is rock solid! Boooya, boooya!!!! I can hear MC Hammer now.... "You can't touch this"

[GtrDudeL]

@Landotter1 apples & apples.... lol!! U'r logic is severely flawed. and sorry, P3's can not take off on a single engine - that's a fact. U sound like an old P# hand... letting the old guard go must B tough... : (

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL Nothing flawed about it. Just cut the power in half on both birds and what do you get? Both can still fly. I repair P3's so what? They still do the job just fine.... Of course I don't want them to go away any time soon. They pay my bills, again simple logic that isn't flawed.... Now you, on the other hand.... I won't even argue with you.... I don't have time.....

[GtrDudeL]

@Landotter1 sorry - its flawed... U can't 'cut the power in half' - the APL is what it is... U'r just trying to artificially level an un-level playing field. P3s R great planes, served their country well... hopefully the P8 will too. If U repair a P3 U'll B able to work on P8's.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL You aren't understanding what i'm saying man. You started off by saying that a

P3 can't fly on one engine and a P8 can. It is you who missed the bus here. I don't know of ANY 4 engine design that can take off and fly on just one engine so that is an unfair comparison to start with. So I added that if you only use one P8 engine, that means the total power of that AC is divided by 2 so I took away 2 of the 4 engines on a P3, dividing the total power by 2 Nothing flaswed about it.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL You're probably right... I seem to remember hearing about a Chinese bird and some REALLY scary stuff that had been done to 2 or 3 of the engines before it came to the US, just as a commercial flight.... We always got the juicy creepy stuff in A&P school..... I guess to remind us that we are bound to perfection or close to it... In other words. We have to do the job as close to perfect as we can so no problems or jail time later.... :-D

[GtrDudeL]

747... by design. The problem is what U'r introducing is that its not apples and apples... if U look at the reliability of 2 v. 4 engine APLs - 2 engines R twice as reliable... statistical fact. So trying to artificially level the playing field isn't apples & apples - I understand what U'r trying to illustrate - but I disagree w/ its application.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL it's simple math..... ANYWAY....

[GtrDudeL]

@Landotter1 btw - total respect 2 U... I visited a few P3's in the design phase of the P8... those involved in maintaining the p3 fleet R very skilled & knowledgeable... Its a true labor of love keeping those old birds flying.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL Not a cake job to be sure.... They are pretty remarkable planes because there is still plenty of room to modify them for future use.

[GtrDudeL]

@Landotter1 problem is they R well past their fatigue design life.... that's why they were being torn apart & re-winged as an interim fix until the P8's were on line. From what I understand the operational/maintenance costs were becoming prohibitive due to the advanced age of the fleet. The P3 maintenance guys I met were real artisans/craftsmen that took immense pride in their work - a rare and dying breed.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL No sir... not a cut and paste world, these old birds... Sometimes, we have to fabricate parts that haven't been made in 40 years. IOW pull it out of our asses!!! :-D We repair many parts on our birds. The Navy is happy with our work and keeps bringing them in for us to repair so.... Sure it will stop when the P8's come on line.... I like to build parts but it is a challenge to be sure. Not a bad task though. I don't like drilling into a 160,000.00 wing plank much. NO room for mistakes

[GtrDudeL]

R U up @ whidbey?

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL ???

[GtrDudeL]

@Landotter1 I'm in WA, we visited Whidbey Naval Air-station to talk w/ mechanics, pilots and tour the plane & facilitates during the design phase of the P8.

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL I'm at L3 Communications, Waco Texas

[GtrDudeL]

@Landotter1 awesome dude! I know what U mean - I worked fleet support on 707s - no parts around... lol - everything is either scavenged or fabricated by hand like U said. No worries mate - anyone w/ those kind of skills will B in demand for a long time to come! Keep up the good work!!

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL Thanks for the kind words! :-D

[Landotter1]

@GtrDudeL speaking of parts fab. I just built a bracket (simple enough) that goes in the #2 fuel tank. I looked at the date on the drawing.... 1960.... What a trip... 5 years before I was born.... wow.... and these planes are still flying and doing the job... double wow.... I know that things need to be changed and go on to new technology but ya gotta respect the P3's. They are still going strong.... just amazing....

[TrAkMan83]

@Landotter1 I actually just started at there back in mid Sep. '11. I used to work at Lockheed in Greenville, SC. I'm 28 and i've been working on P3s my entire sheetmetal career (7 1/2yrs.).

[Landotter1]

@TrAkMan83 Where are you working now? S.C.?

[TrAkMan83]

@Landotter1 No no. Used to work in SC at Lockheed. Now i work at L3 in Waco as well.

[Landotter1]

@TrAkMan83 ooooh ok... I'm in 7400 night shift

[TrAkMan83]

@Landotter1 I'm 7400 day shift. On Scooter's crew

[Landotter1]

@TrAkMan83 I don't know scooter but that's cool! Small world huh? I work for Randy Vines but on nights.

[Landotter1]

@kayakerguy01 Dude, they fly p3's through hurricanes, are you kidding me.... P3's can take almost anything handed to them.... :-D P8? What's a P8??? :-D

[Louisthefish23]

hmm.... why dont they use the mordenisation version of this? Or is that for other military's who do not have much money?

[lostend1]

@Louisthefish23 They tried to in the 90's but the program was cut to save money.

[Landotter1]

@Louisthefish23 My MRO DOES modernize them. There are only some things that get replaced because it is such a strong plane. Wings and empenage connect points are major common replacement items and then they are up and flying again.... The rest of the airframe was designed and built so well that there isn't much to rebuild as it is in such good shape.... They put all kinds of new toys on them. I have no idea what they are (don't care either) but yeah, they modernize them all the time.

[airman193]

My NJROTC instructor was a P3 pilot when he was active. It makes me wonder how he feels about the P8 transition.

[Palanthon]

I flew with Capt Moran, (then LCDR) in VP-16. A good man. Glad to see he is still in the Navy.

[rb21122b]

Does that mean the Hurricane Hunters will be using this 737? lol

[scenepointjudge]

I love how they pick an UDIII to display the current P-3 in contrast to the P-8. Let's see the P-8 do the things a number of certain P-3s do. The P-8 is stupid and a waste of money.

[snooppupc130jrketmas]

i talked to a navy blue angels member last night and he was telling me how the p-3 is the newest, but its over 20 flippin years old!!!!sure its great, but the p-8 is probably alot faster. he said itll have better equipment n stuff. he used to work on the p-3, and he votes p-8. plus , hes a blue angel.

[TheSarahpeyton]

wow i cant believe they are tkaing the P-3s out of the game. I grew up with those planes. My Dad was a flight engineer on them. Good times. we were stationed in pax about two years ago.

[jimmydcap]

Wow P3 has been around for 40 yrs.

[GP9railfan]

@jimmydcap More like 55 years if you count the P-3A's also. 40 years if you only count the P-3B/C series. The P-3 is based on the Lockheed Electra II airliner, with shorter wings, & shorter forward fuselage section, chopped about 10 feet off at the FS 288 bulkhead. Everything else is identical, except for the Mad boom/aft radar, & the nose radome is slightly different (stubbier).

[LincTexPilot]

A P-3 can fly all of the following at once: Low, slow, and for a VERY long time with engines 1 and 4 loitered. A 737 based aircraft can only do two of those. The turbofan engines don't like low and slow or they burn lots of fuel. They are better at altitude.... Props work better at lower altitudes. The P-3 will be around until at least 2015, some say even 2019.

[gdeaconnz]

The P-8 isn't supposed to do all the jobs of the Orion - this is what this video describes. UAV's are able to do a number of the jobs that Orions currently do, and for a much longer period. It's about working smarter, not harder.

[tyrone9009]

One question, and anyone who flew on P-3's can relate. Does this new aircraft have a flushable toilet?

[cornrowcity]

It looks like they're retiring the P-3 Orions.

[chiefibnfe]

This is going to be Awesome and rainbows and butterflies are going to fly out my ass. Figured out the bombay problems yet?

[rap9206]

It makes sense because this is a military version of the Boeing 737 just like the KC-135 is the Boeing 707, and the Presidents big jet is the Boeing 747.

It keeps everything standard, easier to maintain, with a proven track record.

[duker1231]

I think INDIA Brought 8 of these...

Next on the Menu:--

SINKING PAKISTANI AND CHINESE SUBS....

Jai Hind!!!

[95predator]

fuck china and pakistan theyre not democratic

india ftw yay^^

greets from germany

hope you chose eurofighter so we get money :P

[franticfritz]

Funny how when they show internal vid of P-3, they show the old ass 70's tech (ASA-70) installed that is only used for bounce birds now. Way to make a selling point.

[ironfalcon100]

The Poseidon's internals are found in the CGI video.

[taylord1]

im just going thro school for p3s. by the time i get to the fleet they will be moving on to p8 and more school for me!

[tyrone9009]

nah, P-3's will be around for a while. Supposed to be until 2017.

[lurkinsherman]

Somehow I don't see a jet being able to accomplish the same low altitude, low speed submarine thumping we could do with a P3. But maybe other technology allows us to hunt from higher altitudes... personally I'd prefer the A320 - it has in my opinion far better control, maneuverability and failure recovery than the 737 but the Boeing is made in America so it's certainly more appropriate to use. Nonetheless I live near the old Moffet Field and I miss the P3's - they're gorgeous birds!

[tyrone9009]

it has a lot better technology.

[tyrone9009]

if anyone in here has ever flown on p-3's, could you imagine being able to refuel?

[FENIX1174]

I think AIRBUS can do the same with a A320. what do you guys think?

[relixxx]

sure, why not?

[bullcurr]

agreed!

[drummerboy5192]

the p-8 needs turbo props bcuz there more fuel effiant and can go really fast like the p-3. there nothing like the sound of a p-3 50 feet from the water, full throttle, it amazing (says my dad hehe)

[kdraper2007]

no one I know would call the P-3 fast. the p-8 will be much faster. & newer jet engines are as efficent as turbo props.

[1jimcox]

I was a P3 ADJ in the 70s. I guess I'm getting to be an old fart. I remember a few of the As and Bs were so cannabalized, they were effectively being retired even back then.

[FlightSimulatorXATC]

The first flight of this thing was April 24.

[BrimHawk]

Kinda cool to see the landing gear being wheeled across the floor.

I had a fairly substantial hand in getting that gear made.

Not sure if it was mentioned, but the plane is based on the 737-800.

[SkateboardBassguitar]

my granddad was a P3 flight egineer in the Dutch Navy, the planes already retired in 2006

[Cummins359power]

Looks alot like a P-3A/B inside.

[Kim521970]

I will believe when it is on flightline in front of me

[NordicBlondeBeauty]

Pax River = God's Country!

Nice tube, but no FE? Too sad.

[an147]

So it´s goodbye to the P-3. So sad.

[ArticCat66]

Well..in American service anyway. Sad to see it go...but the P3 will remain in service with Canada, and dozens of other countries for years to come.

[kandem360]

indeed it is. the CP-140 Aurora(P3 Orion) is now on Block 3 modifications. We'll stretch out the life span of any aircraft I guess. I am not sure wether Canada will follow suit. With the needs of our Air Force, A turbo fan engine doesn't seem logical. Turbo-prop all the way.

[air01air]

the third test unit's fuselage was just finished less than a month ago

[Froogleplex]

ooooooh noooo... i love the p-3

[depusn2007]

gotta love how it says expected delivery in 2009. They keep telling us at the earliest in 2012 maybe 2013. But hey it will make AT's jobs a lot easier.

[Whiteplane]

I used to see P-3s when I went camping on the coast,but I got to see the P-8 at the Renton plant

[genxer74]

I thought they scrapped the in flight refueling capability...

Be interesting to fly without an FE anymore :(

[scenepointjudge]

I dread the day. No more job for me when that thing gets implemented!

[Landotter1]

@scenepointjudge Me either.... I repair p3's