Sorry but a sub is a sub, oceanography is oceanography, noisy Chinese SSN, Pakistan and Burma, sorry Bud, but I've spent more time on top of Russian nucs than you've had hot dinners. An acoustics operator

My hero...
:rolleyes:

Possibly to keep as similar a fit as possible to the US? They don't bother with MAD on the P-8 - I seem to remember some discussion at the time it first flew on this but they answer seemed to be it wasn't going to spend much time at low level IIRC.

But Nimrod could shut down 2 engines to loiter; try that with Posiedonhttps://www.pprune.org/images/icons/46.gif

ISTR it was tried with all four engines shut down ;)

Thought it was three?

Shutting down an engine on a modern jet hurts fuel burn and time on station. If you shutdown all engines, fuel burn is impressive but time on station becomes horrid.

'Those that know' was a new US personnel to the P-8. I have no reasons to doubt him. He clearly stated this on a USN forum. If you had a classified brief on the P-8. You are welcome to call him out.

The first link mentioned laser. Some 20 years ago the Aussies mounted their depth sounding laser on a US P-3. It would be interesting to see where this tech has reached.
https://www.dst.defence.gov.au/innov...h-sounder-lads
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ce94bea35a.jpg

God knows we've waited long enough to see that idiotic policy finally laid to rest..................

I was being sarcastic :rolleyes:

First RAF P8 arriving at Kinloss on the 4th Feb between 13.00 and 15.00, according to a post on Fighter Control.

https://www.fightercontrol.co.uk/for...56031#p1156031

One is due for the show at Fairford, according to todays press release.

For Surplus:
Let me offer you a couple of ideas on why the US P-8 might not have a MAD boom on it.
They are going to leave the MAD (or other) hunting circles to the helicopters, under the operational theory that the open ocean or GI/UK gap scenario that we grew up with in the Cold War (when you had all of that contact time) isn't how the requirements document for P-8 was written.

FWIW: the MH-60R does have MAD. (The MAD reeling machine's on the starboard side of the helicopter, just as it was on the SH-60B and the SH-60F).
MAD is a localization tool more than a search tool.

I have some friends (P-3 guys) who used to loved to do MAD traps in a P-3; but in a combined force ASW op, rather than "one plane by itself", they tended to leave low level stuff to the rotary wing assets.Better air space deconfliction that way, and for that matter the P-3's tended to try and stay ahead of the problem ... with their on station time/range/speed advantage over ships and helos, they could.

So why would the Indian P-8 have MAD?

I'll take a SWAG on that: their operational concept includes more frequent instances of the P-8 as a solo ASW platform who needs that localization tool for the mission environment that the Indian Navy envision. And maybe some of the (other) stuff isn't in their equipment suite just yet.
As I am not in the Indian Navy, the above is a guess.
There could be other reasons.

Decision by UK in that regard have already been covered.

So after all that, it is going to be operated by the Army????

No, it is going to use Kinloss until Lossiemouth is ready to accept the aircraft later this year.