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."

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.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...vy/2018p8a.pdf

FY2018 rather than 2017

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."

Slightly concerning?

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?

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.

It's by no means clear which buoys are fielded as of now.

I think that's removing the Foreman grill and the name of the pie warmer replacing it.. All part of the UK mods.

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

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.

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 https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...i/external.png
(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. )

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.

UK's first Poseidon takes shape in Renton
 

Recent article on Flight Global:-

Sorry....but the "epic moment" was when the RAF got out of the MPA business when they binned the Nimrods.

SAS - I think you've got it wrong - if ever a programme was "self-binning" it was the Nimrod saga :(

That green on acft #1 is much more in tune with today's rainbow armed forces than hemp!

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?

I say co-incidence, they wanted them all to be ZP8**