Boeing Begins Final Assembly of 1st P-8A Poseidon

(Source: Boeing Co; issued April 3, 2008)

ST. LOUIS --- Boeing on Monday began final assembly of the first P-8A Poseidon for the U.S. Navy. The P-8A will provide increased capability in long-range anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

The start of final assembly follows closely on the heels of Spirit AeroSystems' delivery of the first P-8A fuselage to Boeing in Renton, Wash. Mechanics loaded the fuselage into a tooling fixture and began installing systems, wires, tubing and other small parts. Boeing will join the P-8A's wings to its body later this year.

"The Navy expects us to meet each and every commitment, and achieving this milestone demonstrates that the P-8A team is up to the task, "said Bob Feldmann, Boeing vice president and P-8A program manager. “Our Boeing Commercial Airplanes and Spirit AeroSystems teammates deserve credit for their outstanding performance and teamwork in building the wings and fuselage for the first test aircraft."

Boeing Integrated Defense Systems and Boeing Commercial Airplanes are working together to build the P-8A, a military derivative of the 737-800, on a new, third final-assembly production line in Renton, Wash. The third line takes advantage of the proven efficiencies, manufacturing processes and performance of the highly reliable Next-Generation 737. Using established best practices and common commercial production system tools enables Boeing to reduce flow-time and cost while ensuring first-pass quality.

"We are honored to support the men and women who serve our country, and take great pride in building the Navy's newest production aircraft here in Renton," said Mo Yahyavi, Boeing vice president and P-8 program manager for Boeing Commercial Airplanes.

The P-8A is built by a Boeing-led industry team that includes CFM International, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Spirit AeroSystems and GE Aviation. Under the current System Development and Demonstration contract, the team will build five test vehicles: three flight-test and two ground-test aircraft. Delivery of the first test aircraft to the Navy and first flight are scheduled for 2009.

The Navy plans to purchase 108 P-8As to replace its fleet of P-3C aircraft. Initial operational capability is slated for 2013.

ALL
If Boeing falls on its collective face again, the LM P3C line is still operative.
end

The P-3 is such a proven platform I always wondered why they just don't build some new ones? LM is still building new C-130's after all these years.

If it a matter of not have the tooling anymore and not wanting to re-invent it a non cargo hauling "P-130" would seem to fill the bill quite well.

I know jet engines have come along way since there early gas hog days but it still seems to me that for slow speeds and especially the low altitudes that sub hunting takes place at a turboprop would be so much more effecient.

It is sort of ironic that on this project they are partners with Northrop/Grumman

Chief the P-3 platform for continued work would have to have updating. The propeller systems like the prop control on the each engine is very out of date. When there were plans several years ago for GE and another company to build new turboprop version, a solid state prop control was in the works. Most of the problems the P-3 had was with its prop control and engine rigging. It is a great platform, but its getting more maintenance intensive.
Many felt it was also getting to the stage of being as far along as it could go on the design.
There was a cargo version of it and that's where the P-3 came from, the Lockheed Electra. Bandleader and entertainer Arthur Godfrey owned one as a private aircraft.
The Americans have always looked at the British and the Nimrod, which they've operated, with success, for quite a long time.
Besides the P-3 has been around since the Cuban Missile Crisis. time to look and do a successor.

ALL
When I left LM in 1999, they were hoping to get the P3 line up and running again. But, as J.. has said, the prop technology is old. The C130J has an entirely different prop mechanism than the older versions. I dont know the tech details, but this J version is out there now and operating in USAF as well as out country.
ASW work for the Pacific seems to be the driver these days, with the Chinese coming out with diesels and smaller boats. Finding the boomers of the old USSR days seems to be over.
We need this type of aircraft, able to do a lot of missions, fly long duration and be multi tasked avionics wired.
end

Yep Slim, the prop control on the 130J model was supposed to be one or one like the unit they wanted to put on the newer P-3 and the other one that was proposed in the 80s.
Those prop controls and valve housings! Geez What mess! There had to be something better coming down the line.

I was not advocating keeping the P-3's that are in the inventory now, yes they are nearing the end of the road, although it is interesting how you see that some even OLDER ones have been snapped up and turned into firefighting tankers, so someone must think that those old birds have some life left in them.

Not withstanding the British Nimrod experience I just don't see a commericial jet, a 737 in this case which is made to fly high and go fast being ideally suited for sub hunting which happens down low and going pretty slow.

I would think that if they were to use the C-130-J airframe they would have room for everything that is now in a P-3 with room to spare.

Performancewise a C-130-J will not equal a 737 but as I understand it they do fly faster and higher than the original C-130's did. I also understand that the new engines they have are more efficient giving them greater range than the originals, they may give a 737 a run for the money in that department.

Long loiter time, a definite plus in sub hunting!

One thing you guys are missing the point on here is also the leaps and bounds of jet engine technology. With the new type partial and total bypass and ducted fan engines, jets don't have to fly high or fast to stay in the air. Remember the experimental birds NASA was doing in the 70s and 80s, jets that could almost hover in the air and come in VERY VERY slow for landings. and short take off and landings. Don't think all the data on these tests with over and under the wing exhaust systems has been filed away and forgotten. The days of the 4 mile long runway and 35,000 foot alitiude for flying jets is still here. Its a whole new ball game and I do believe those boys in St. Louis, Renton and Chicago know what they're doing.
I remember someone thirty years ago saying thrust vectoring will never work, its too complicated and will never function right. Hmmmm Seems they were wrong there too.

I am not saying that you can't go low and slow in a 737 but traditionally at low altitudes jet engines are gas hogs, maybe they are a little better these days.

I am not a jet engine mechanic or a pilot but I have spent a lot of time riding C-5's and 141's and lots of hours the back of several 135 variants. If we were ever down low you needed more throttle to maintain altitude at a slower speed.

A few times when we had pressurization problems and had to fly at 10-12 K a 2 or 3 hour flight became 5 or 6 and fuel flows were higher than at altitude.

The only aircraft of that lot unless you were flying newer 135s was equipped with the older type turbojet engines. The newer ones including the C-5 were using turbofans. Big difference betwwen.
I was a jet engine mech and,yes,a jet gulps fuel at a bigger rate down lower. That is why turboprop engines were invented. You get the high altitude efficency of a jet with the low altitude effiency of a propeller.
That is changing in favor of striaght jets. Also you're looking at different kinds of mission requirements. If the subchaser doesn't have to spend all that time down low, he can be higher especially with stronger sonobuoys and increased power radar and detection devices. I can't go into alot of P-3 operating secrets but the electronic suites have vastly changed since the early and later P-3s so maybe just maybe the chaser doesn't need to be that low and slow like they used to.
Turbo prop engine and prop system have two engine speeds, off and full bore. Its the propeller angle that controls a turboprop, not the thrust. You have Alpha and Beta ranges on your throttles.

First P-8A Poseidon Gets Its Wings

(Source: Boeing Co.; issued May 8, 2008)

ST. LOUIS --- Boeing joined the wing assembly and fuselage of the first P-8A Poseidon for the U.S. Navy on May 1 in Renton, Wash. Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (IDS) and Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA) are working together to build the P-8A, a military derivative of the 737-800, on a new final assembly line.

The factory's third line takes advantage of the proven efficiencies, manufacturing processes and performance of the highly reliable Next-Generation 737.

The next major P-8A assembly milestone will be engine installation this summer. The Boeing-led Poseidon industry team remains on track for delivery of the first test aircraft to the Navy in 2009. Under the current System Development and Demonstration contract, the team will build five test vehicles: three flight-test and two ground-test aircraft.

The Navy plans to purchase 108 P-8As to replace its fleet of P-3C aircraft. Initial operational capability is slated for 2013. The P-8A will provide increased capability in long-range anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

-ends-

Sarge, what's the proposed powerplant for this bird supposed to be? I haven't heard.

The P8A will use CFM International (a joint venture of GE U.S. and SNECMA of France) CFM 56-7B27A high bypass turbofan engines each rated at 120kN (kilo Newtons).

Engines Installed on 1st P-8A Poseidon

(Source: Boeing Co.; issued June 1, 2008)

ST. LOUIS --- Boeing installed two CFM56-7B engines on the U.S. Navy's first P-8A Poseidon June 21 in Renton, Wash. The on-schedule assembly closely follows the aircraft's wing-to-body join and "power on" milestones.

Following final functional checks, the Boeing-led Poseidon industry team will conduct initial engine runs. Boeing will deliver the first test aircraft to the Navy in 2009.

Engine installation is the culmination of efforts by Boeing and partner CFM International to leverage Lean practices from commercial industry to maximize efficiency. Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (IDS) and Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA) are working together to build the P-8A, a military derivative of the 737-800, on a new final assembly line. The factory's third line takes advantage of the manufacturing processes and performance of the highly reliable Next-Generation 737.

The CFM engines, with 27,300 pounds of thrust, have industry-leading dispatch reliability in excess of 99.99 percent. CFM delivered the engines to Boeing in early May.

The Navy plans to purchase 108 P-8As to replace its fleet of P-3C aircraft. Initial operational capability is slated for 2013. The P-8A will provide increased capability in long-range anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

-ends-

Lockheed Demos HAAWC Compatibility in Wind Tunnel Tests

(Source: Lockheed Martin; issued July 9, 2008)

ORLANDO, FL --- Lockheed Martin’s enhanced High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapons Capability (HAAWC) system recently completed a series of successful high speed wind tunnel tests at a commercial facility in Buffalo, NY.

The HAAWC employs a modified Lockheed Martin LongShot Wing Adapter Kit on the MK-54 to allow the launch of torpedoes from high altitudes and long standoff ranges. This technology enables P-3C and P-8A aircrews to launch from outside the range of enemy air defenses. The system is also compatible with shipboard Vertical Launch Systems (VLS).

“We made some minor design changes to the existing, proven design in order to make it compatible with the P-8 and VLS Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC), in addition to the P-3,” said Jim Pappafotis, director of the HAAWC program at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. “The capability of the system did not change with the new design. HAAWC provides increased mission effectiveness and lethality to both P-3s and P-8s, as well as increases to survivability of both of the aircrew and the aircraft.”

HAAWC is a low-cost, self-contained wing adaptor kit that provides range extension and autonomous guidance to a family of existing air-to-surface munitions. No aircraft modification is required to deploy a HAAWC equipped munition. The system is completely self-contained, including a flight control computer, a GPS-based navigation system and power sources.

In the wind tunnel test, HAAWC demonstrated expected performance over the full regime of weapon release conditions from the P-3C and P-8A aircraft, enabling the torpedo to be launched at the maximum desired range and altitude from the target. The tests followed successful flight tests of the original system in a Navy sponsored evaluation.

Previous versions of the system were compatible with only the P-3C platform, but with the design modifications, HAAWC can be used on all U.S. Navy aircraft used in anti-submarine warfare. In addition, HAAWC can also be successfully employed with MK-41 VLS used to launch torpedoes from surface vessels.

The system consists of a wing kit and tail kit connected to the existing torpedo. The wing kit is attached to the torpedo by two metal bands. A pyrotechnic device forces open the bands, enabling the wing kit to jettison normally from the torpedo. In operation, the wing kit jettisons when the torpedo reaches its normal launch altitude close to the surface of the water. From that point, the torpedo follows its normal operational procedures as it would in a normal low altitude launch from a P-3C or P-8A.

HAAWC reduces fuel consumption and minimizes mechanical stress on the P-3C and P-8A launching aircraft by allowing it to stay at altitude to launch HAAWC-equipped torpedoes. This will assist in extending the mission time-on-station and reducing fatigue on those aircraft currently in U.S. Navy service as well as future Navy aircraft.

When used on the VLS ASROC, HAAWC provides enhanced range, allowing the launching vessel to stay farther away from a submarine. This significantly enhances the survivability of the launch vessel.

The high-altitude torpedo launch concept is NOT to enable P-8/P-3 aircraft to launch torpedoes from outside of a target's air defenbses... the targets are submarines and today no submarine in the world has an air-defense missile system. Several navies are (and have in the past) discussed such systems, but none exists today. Further, the Mk 54 cannot be used against surface targets (nor could its predecessors, the Mk 46 and Mk 50 torpedoes.)

Pure and simple, the torpedo launch scheme is needed to keep the aircraft at high altitude for fuel efficiency. Indeed, the Navy has deleted the MAD system from the P-8 because the aircraft will fly too high on ASW searches to use that (excellent) localization system.

Norman

For people wondering what would have happened to a P-3 update program, just look at what happened with the UK MoD and the Nimrod updates... same era of aircraft. Same problems.

They tried. In 1987 reps from GE and Lockheed came around and were asking squadron maintenance people what could be improved and make life easier if they did a P-3 type update aircraft. We gave them a nice list of things we wanted in a new P-3 type aircraft. When the initial plan came out we got most of the improvements we asked for. But one day, not long after that, we heard that they were not going to do an improved turboprop type P-3 style aircraft because it would be "Too Exspensive."
Main thing we wanted was an updated propeller control system. The old one on the P-3 was a pain in the arse to keep maintained and properly rigged. (50s technology)