Surveillance Aircraft, JET vs PROP
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to Basics
I had the singular good fortune to fly the Shack, Neptune, Nimrod and Orion, with at least 1,000 hours on each. I loved them all; great aircraft and crews to go into battle with!
I think that the low altitude noise signature is irrelevant. In modern ASW the MPA will spend the Search/Detect phase at high, fuel-efficient altitudes. The submarine can only detect the MPA noise signature if he is shallow and the MPA is at low level.
So it boils down to jet versus turbo-prop.
My strongly held belief is that any MPA must have four engines. My experience would ask for a new design of airframe, with a flexible wing to ride the bumps; a weapons bay as big as the Nimrod; four new-generation turbo-props, which have 'loadsa' thrust and efficient curved blades, plus in-flight refuelling.
Perhaps a design incorporating the best of the Nimrod, Orion and, yes, not forgetting the Bear Delta. That would give us a full Pint, replenishable too!
I think that the low altitude noise signature is irrelevant. In modern ASW the MPA will spend the Search/Detect phase at high, fuel-efficient altitudes. The submarine can only detect the MPA noise signature if he is shallow and the MPA is at low level.
So it boils down to jet versus turbo-prop.
My strongly held belief is that any MPA must have four engines. My experience would ask for a new design of airframe, with a flexible wing to ride the bumps; a weapons bay as big as the Nimrod; four new-generation turbo-props, which have 'loadsa' thrust and efficient curved blades, plus in-flight refuelling.
Perhaps a design incorporating the best of the Nimrod, Orion and, yes, not forgetting the Bear Delta. That would give us a full Pint, replenishable too!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: A 1/2 World away from Ice Statio Kilo
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends what you want to survey and how cashed up you are. Prop aircraft have certain agricultural feel and can take a fair bit of rough, but they also give it back, try picking your nose on the edge of a typhoon you will have your eye out
.
Old yella has forgotten his RCS equation and the number of spinning discs will make it easier to be seen on a AI RADAR, this is why we don’t let him use the RADAR any more he just watches now
.
There are some little jets out there that would satisfy your round trip of Taiwan or up and down the Malacca Straits and could be fitted out well.
Charlie sends
.Old yella has forgotten his RCS equation and the number of spinning discs will make it easier to be seen on a AI RADAR, this is why we don’t let him use the RADAR any more he just watches now
.There are some little jets out there that would satisfy your round trip of Taiwan or up and down the Malacca Straits and could be fitted out well
.Charlie sends
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Future Hunter
Relatively efficient compared to the turbojet Spey (part of the reason Newrod is getting turbofans!)
Compare the SFC* of the Spey with the Avon & Olympus turbojets, the Conway "first-generation" "low-bypass" turbofan, and the Rolls-Royce Deutschland (RRD) BR710 "high-bypass" turbofan.
*lb fuel/lb thrust/hour
Avon RA29/1 (Comet 4/4B/4C): 10,500 lb.static thrust; .775 max take-off; .95 cruise
Olympus mk101 (Vulcan B.1): 11,000 lb.s.t.; .75 m.t.o.; .80? cruise
Conway RCo.12 (DC-8/B707): 17,500 lb.s.t.; .712 m.t.o.; .90 cruise
Spey mk250 (Nimrod MR1): 11,995 lb.s.t.; .63 m.t.o.; .79 cruise
BR710 (Nimrod MRA4): 14,900 lb.s.t.; .39 m.t.o.; .65 cruise
