If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Mike- If they're anything like those we had on the ship they'll suck - or
they'll be the same movie for five hops in a row. BRBR Good ole days, when the moovie was the big reel type, lights out, at 2100, after last event manned up. P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
John Alger wrote in message . ..
I think the MMA will do just fine. Gets out and back quicker, can stay on station longer, carries more goodies, better crew comfort (plenty important on 8-14 hour missions) and has in-flight refueling - all plusses. It will do just fine because it will be the only game in town (assuming BAMS doesn't totally eclipse the manned platform concept at some point). Actually it will do fine because of BAMS. There are some real drawbacks to this aircraft at this point though. It can't live down low and slow for very long,and in a single engine situation could find itself out of gas before it could get back to feet dry...Ok, it could refuel while airborne, but how many stray tankers are about in MPA areas of ops? Unless something is done to harden the fuel and electrical systems from otherwise inconsequential damage, this aircraft will be a very vulnerable asset in the coming years. Companies like AGAT and Novator- not to mention the Chinese- are already marketing long range SAM and AAM systems that threaten the heretofore "invulnerable" large military aircraft that have operated mostly unfettered since the end of WWII. It will be expensive to back engineer such fixes. Also don't forget these aircraft, like the rest of the Navy, will be expected to operate in the historically lethal Littorals much of the time and not well out at sea. The chances of them taking fire is much greater than the P-3 had to face through most of its lifetime. Its RCS is huge, and the chances of avoiding those threats will be much more problematic. I'd say the proposed LockMart SOF "MACK" would be a much more suitable platform...But of course this MMA contract was a very overt political gift to Boeing according to AvLeak. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
I was talking to a guy at work who is in the reservr P-3 community and has
experience FLYING the MMA he said it is not suitable at low altitude the whole package is not to standards and is wondering how combat damage resistamt it will be made. Sparky Question for the naval aviators: How is the new 737 MMA going to perform as the P-3s replacement? I know it's bigger, carries more "stuff" and whatnot, but from what I know of jet engines (even high-bypass fans), won't it be very fuel INefficient in the same regime as the P-3 prowls? Cruising along at 1000' or so and around 200 KIAS? Or is the MMA going to be punching out sonobuoys from a much higher altitude and at a much higher speed? Is this aircraft the real answer or is it more taxpayer money into the gaping maw of the military-industrial copmplex? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Elmshoot wrote:
I was talking to a guy at work who is in the reservr P-3 community and has experience FLYING the MMA he said it is not suitable at low altitude the whole package is not to standards and is wondering how combat damage resistamt it will be made. Sparky How quickly can you get a handheld SAM through the hatch of a Chinese sub and ready to fire? -HJC |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
elmshoot- is wondering how combat damage resistamt it
will be made. BRBR Combat damage? From what? The microwave breaking loose and hitting an aircrew on the fott? P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Pechs,
Combat damage? From what? The microwave breaking loose and hitting an aircrew on the fott? No. From further engagements with PLAAF F-8s. But with combat hardening of the airframe, we could deploy VPF outfits. g -- Mike Kanze "They had a profile of John Kerry on the news and they said his first wife was worth around $300 million and his second wife, his current wife, is worth around $700 million. His intern (with whom he supposedly had an affair) was worth several more million. So when John Kerry says he's going after the wealthy in this country, he's not just talking. He's doing it!" - Jay Leno "Pechs1" wrote in message ... elmshoot- is wondering how combat damage resistamt it will be made. BRBR Combat damage? From what? The microwave breaking loose and hitting an aircrew on the fott? P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
(Pechs1) wrote in message ...
elmshoot- is wondering how combat damage resistamt it will be made. BRBR Combat damage? From what? The microwave breaking loose and hitting an aircrew on the fott? P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer A few things Pechs. The MMA will be spending a whole lot more time in the Littorals than MPA's of old. That will put them in near proximity to a whole host of threats. Als, there is a whole new generation of threats specifically targing the aircraft that have historically remained on the perepheries of the battlespace. Apparently some of our potential adversaries see the center of gravity these aircraft represent in our new found net-centric ways of war. It appears they wish to exploit this vulnerability too. Check out some of these links: http://in.rediff.com/news/2003/oct/21china.htm There were reports that Pakistan may soon acquire Chinese-made 'AWACS killer' to counter Phalcons. According to the reports, Islamabad was eying Chinese-built FT-2000 surface-to-air missile, commonly known as 'AWACS killer'. http://www.china-defense.com/aviatio...af-ops-21.html China has also developed the FT-2000 mobile SAM. This SAM is based on the S-300 and is designed to engage radiating aircraft, such as airborne jammers and airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft. China first tested the FT-2000 in September 1998, then conducted the first field trials during a series of exercises in 1999. http://www.vor.ru/science/madeinrus8_eng.html Russia's latest S-400 "Triumph" air defence system is capable of hitting AWACS early warning planes. S-400 is unique for fighting enemy planes. It is designed to hit both present-day and future means for air attack: tactical and strategic aircraft, cruise missiles of the "Tomahawk" type and other missiles at a distance of 400 kilometers. http://www.ainonline.com/Publication...1agatpg85.html If used on a long-range missile airframe, the ARGS-PD could give an opposing air force the ability to take out strategic targets at distances outside of the normal interception envelopes of U.S. or other NATO fighters. Boeing E-3 AWACS or E-8 JSTARS aircraft–platforms that U.S. forces depend heavily upon in time of conflict–would be vulnerable as never before. http://www.stormpages.com/jetfight/wwwboard/2359.html JANE'S MISSILES AND ROCKETS - MARCH 01, 2004 Novator offers a redesigned KS-172S-1 long-range AAM Piotr Butowski Sukhoi has displayed a model of the Su-35 multirole fighter carrying under its wings two KS-172S-1 ultra-long range air-to-air missiles, writes Piotr Butowski. The weapon is an export variant of a missile originally offered to the Russian Air Force by the Novator Company of Yekaterinburg. Maximum range of the KS-172S-1 export variant is 300km; the version proposed for Russian air forces is believed to have a range of 400km. The missile will be used against air targets flying at altitudes from 3m to 30km with speeds up to 4,000km/h and manoeuvring at up to 12g. Typical targets could include all types of aircraft (including AWACS or J-STARS platforms, tankers, reconnaissance and electronic-warfare aircraft), cruise missiles, as well as long and medium-range anti-aircraft missiles which pose a threat to the KS-172-armed fighter. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Mike- No. From further engagements with PLAAF F-8s. BRBR
yep, I'll take a P-3 weenie in a fight with the chinese 'fighter pilots' anyday. When the balloon goes up with China, it's going to be another "Marianna's 'spicey turkey with almonds' shoot"- P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
also- Als, there is a whole new generation of
threats specifically targing the aircraft that have historically remained on the perepheries of the battlespace. BRBR AWACS and MPA are not the same thing. An AWACS loitering at 30,000 feet and a MPA wandering around in the weeds are not the same. P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|