Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RAF Poseidon - Not too long to wait?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RAF Poseidon - Not too long to wait?

Old 31st Jan 2019, 00:57
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 738
Originally Posted by reader8 View Post
Just out of interest, does anyone have good gen on how the aircraft is looking in terms of introduction to service?

Is the aircraft based on CS25 airworthiness standards throughout with a good solid CAMO, or have we engineered some means to assure a PT/MAA/Boeing/1 Gp 4-way scrap into the next few years?
You can see how many ECPs there are here and the progress of OT&E on them - but not the content of each. At least those that have an interest can Google future reports.
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...vy/2017p8a.pdf

Also found this in a similar document:

"In April 2016, USD(AT&L) approved a revised Navy P-8A acquisition strategy which incorporated all P-8A Increment 3 capability requirements into the baseline P-8A program. These capabilities will now be developed and delivered as a series of ECPs designated as ECPs 4 through 7. They include implementation of significant open system architecture changes, ASW capability enhancements, communication system upgrades, radar and electronic signal sensor upgrades, and AGM-84 Harpoon 2+ anti-ship missile integration. Navy development of a comprehensive Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) and test schedule for the new P-8A ECP capability releases has been delayed due to evolving capability requirements, potential budget reductions, and schedule uncertainties."

Last edited by RAFEngO74to09; 31st Jan 2019 at 01:07.
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2019, 20:17
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 457
The P-8 is derived from a Part 25 (CS25) compliant airplane (aeroplane), but the P-8 design is not certified under Pt 25. I would be surprised if the British version of the P-8 could be certified under CS25. It would be a needlessly expensive, if not impossible, effort.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2019, 09:57
  #43 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,913
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...vy/2018p8a.pdf

FY2018 rather than 2017
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2019, 10:22
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 46
And the song remains the same..

"P-8A operational suitability has declined since initial fielding in 2013. P-8A ECP 2 OT&E data and fleet-reported metrics show consistently negative trends in fleet-wide aircraft operational availability due to a shortage of critical spare parts and increased maintenance requirements.

Despite negative fleet availability and reliability trends, forward-deployed P-8A units currently report relatively high mission capable rates when sufficient spare parts, expedited logistics supply support, and priority maintenance support are available.

However, prioritizing support for forward-deployed units frequently reduces aircraft availability and increases part cannibalization rates at other fleet operating locations."
weemonkey is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2019, 14:20
  #45 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,913
"Despite significant efforts to improve P-8A intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) sensors, overall P-8A ISR mission capabilities remain limited by sensor performance shortfalls."
Slightly concerning?

The Navy did not complete the planned Multi-Static Active Coherent (MAC) wide area ASW search sensor testing during the ECP 2 OT&E period due to submarine target unavailability. As a result, OPTEVFOR submitted a separate operational test plan to complete remaining MAC ASW test events during future operational test periods.
My understanding is that there is a real shortage of coherent (as opposed to impulsive) active buoys, and that the failure to complete MAC testing is as much down to this as to the lack of targets. Either way, it's clear that MAC - the baseline capability underpinning the claimed superiority of the P-8 in the ASW role, remains unavailable.

High Altitude ASW Weapon Capability (HAAWC) testing remains incomplete, too. How does the P-8A manage to engage targets from FL nosebleed without it?
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2019, 17:50
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
High Altitude ASW Weapon Capability (HAAWC) testing remains incomplete, too. How does the P-8A manage to engage targets from FL nosebleed without it?
Clearly, it doesn't. Like it's predecessor P-3, it would seem the P-8 would need to descend to engage a submerged target with conventional weapons.
KenV is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 06:22
  #47 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,913
It's by no means clear which buoys are fielded as of now.
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 08:11
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: au
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by melmothtw View Post
The latest contract notification mentioned "...engineering change proposal 4 SilverBlock for the government of the UK". Anyone know what this means?
I think that's removing the Foreman grill and the name of the pie warmer replacing it.. All part of the UK mods.
golder is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 08:19
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: au
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by KenV View Post
Clearly, it doesn't. Like it's predecessor P-3, it would seem the P-8 would need to descend to engage a submerged target with conventional weapons.
You may find that there is going to be more work on a standoff, delivered torpedo option. It's getting too dangerous for close, low level stuff.
The P-8 Poseidon Will Get Winged Torpedoes To Kill Subs At Long-Range - The Drive

Last edited by golder; 6th Feb 2019 at 08:29.
golder is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 11:47
  #50 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,913
Though the P-8 can operate at low level, it isn't optimised for that environment, and was supposed to use MAC and HAAWK to allow it to operate from higher altitude. Neither have yet completed testing and neither are operationally available.
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2019, 12:24
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: au
Posts: 41
This is the latest I've seen
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...orpedos-03340/
January 11/19: Boeing tapped for HAAWC integration on P-8A The US Naval Sea Systems ...Boeing a $9.3 million contract modification for the integration of the High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapon Capability (HAAWC)on the Poseidon P-8A submarine-hunting aircraft. The High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapon Capability (HAAWC) provides an all-weather, anti-submarine warfare (ASW) weapon system capable of high altitude launch of the MK-54 torpedo from the P-8A Poseidon. HAAWC consists of a modular, Air Launch Accessory (ALA) kit that attaches to the MK-54 Torpedo. the ALA transforms the MK-54 into a precision-guided glide weapon wich operates in either GPS-aided or GPS-denied environments. Back in June the the US Navy announced, it intended to award Boeing a contract for full rate production of the HAAWC Air Launch Accessory for use in launching the MK 54 Torpedo from the P-8A Poseidon aircraft from high altitude. Work will be performed in Missouri and is expected to be finished by May 2020.


awarded
(Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a $9,276,687 modification to previously awarded contract N00024-13-C-6402 for the Air Launch Accessory (ALA) and ALA shipping container for the ALA of the High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapon Capability in support of the P-8A integration efforts. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri, and is expected to be completed by May 2020. Fiscal 2019 weapons procurement (Navy) funding in the amount of $9,276,687 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. )
golder is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2019, 09:14
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,815
The latest contract notification mentioned "...engineering change proposal 4 SilverBlock for the government of the UK". Anyone know what this means?
Don't know what SilverBlock is.

A Change is 'an alteration to the design which does not affect cost, interchangeability or performance characteristics, and which is not intended to be applied retrospectively, either by the Services or the contractor'.

An Engineering Change Proposal may or may not result in a modification. (A Change is not a modification, but a modification is a change).

That is the decision of the person who controls the design. i.e. If MoD, the Technical Agency.

That definition comes with a health warning. In 2015 MoD withdrew the mandated Defence Standard without replacement.

If it means ECP #4, that is quite impressive. But it could mean MoD has drawn a firm line, which would be unwise if using the above definition.

The important thing, for the audit trail, is that the ECP number must always be tied to any resulting modification number. Again, the Technical Agency ensures this, or the mod cannot be approved.

Last edited by tucumseh; 7th Feb 2019 at 15:12.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 13th May 2019, 18:32
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under a recently defunct flight path.
Age: 72
Posts: 980
UK's first Poseidon takes shape in Renton

Recent article on Flight Global:-
Boeing has mated the wing and fuselage of the UK’s first 737NG-based P-8A Poseidon, as the Royal Air Force (RAF) advances preparations to restore its lapsed maritime patrol aircraft capability.

Posting an image of its lead aircraft on Boeing’s final assembly line in Renton, Washington on Twitter, the RAF on 7 May said that its Marshall Aerospace-produced long-range fuel tanks will be installed “in the coming weeks”.



Crown Copyright

The RAF announced in April that its first Poseidon MRA1 was on schedule “to conduct its first flight this summer”.

Nine Poseidons are on order for the UK, with the modified narrowbodies to enter use with 120 Sqn from RAF Lossiemouth in Scotland from late next year. The adapted 737s will reintroduce a fixed-wing anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare capability lost with the retirement of its British Aerospace Nimrod MR2s in 2010 and cancellation of BAE Systems’ Nimrod MRA4 programme.

Meanwhile, preparations for the Poseidon’s introduction are gathering pace, with a three-bay hangar in construction at RAF Lossiemouth and personnel from 120 Sqn undergoing training in the USA.

Lyneham Lad is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 00:09
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 526
In case you missed it!

ZP801, the first Poseidon MRA Mk1 flew for the first time yesterday. An epic moment for the UK’s MPA Fleet.
betty swallox is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 01:28
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 70
Posts: 16,111
Sorry....but the "epic moment" was when the RAF got out of the MPA business when they binned the Nimrods.
SASless is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 07:26
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 532
SAS - I think you've got it wrong - if ever a programme was "self-binning" it was the Nimrod saga
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 07:39
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 173
That green on acft #1 is much more in tune with today's rainbow armed forces than hemp!

TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 07:51
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,817
For the ‘reggi spotters’, ZP801 MRA Mk1; or a sense of ironic history from a MOD minion.
The Nimrod prototype was the HS type / design number 801.
safetypee is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 08:53
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 46
What knock on effect of the expanding investigation into legacy 737 flight control emergency drills?

Destined to sit on Tarmac until that gets sorted out?
weemonkey is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 09:19
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by safetypee View Post
For the ‘reggi spotters’, ZP801 MRA Mk1; or a sense of ironic history from a MOD minion.
The Nimrod prototype was the HS type / design number 801.
I say co-incidence, they wanted them all to be ZP8**
Davef68 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.