Boeing P-8 - the P3K2 Orion Replacement

[isc]

Thanks Barnsey, I thought that would be the way the RAF would go. isc

[beagle]

Holy Shit. I have been at work all day and come home to all these posts.

Yes well, P8. Looks like everyone, even some with looks like no knowledge of aviation have had a say.

As some have remarked, it is not a sale, but unless I have missed the news that they sent the same questions to Kawasaki regards the P1, then it is a full gone conclusion.

As for the small number, these will be supplemented with the B200/350 and maybe after that lease terminates, Airbus military might have offered us something a bit bigger and more comfortable to operate with.

[Dave Homewood]

Regarding the length of the runway at Whenuapai, I believe we still have the Public Works Act where that pesky village full of NIMBY's at the end of the runway could find themselves being moved out, and paved over. That would sort their noise problem.

[ErrolC]

Apr 30, 2017 21:00:13 GMT 12 Dave Homewood said:

Regarding the length of the runway at Whenuapai, I believe we still have the Public Works Act where that pesky village full of NIMBY's at the end of the runway could find themselves being moved out, and paved over. That would sort their noise problem.

The other end of the runway is both flatter, and a lot less wet (although a bit swampy in places). The house that I lived in from age 8-18 is 950m away from the piano keys, down the centreline.

[delticman]

Apr 30, 2017 18:24:29 GMT 12 mumbles said:

Apr 30, 2017 8:50:08 GMT 12 jeffref said:

You can of course do it but there will be a cost. A third problem is unlike the P3 you can only operate off a long runway which can easily use airports like Greymouth or Kaitaia.

When (if ever) have RNZAF P-3's ever operated out of those or other regional locations? They have been to Invercargill in recent times but that's about it as far as I am aware, and the P-3K2 is itself limited by weight as to which strips in NZ it can use.

Apr 30, 2017 8:50:08 GMT 12 jeffref said:

At full load you are talking about Christchurch, Mangere and maybe Ohakea.

Or Whenuapai even.

A few years ago we had a P3 parked outside the control tower at Wanganui. I've never seen any pictures of them at any other regional airports like Hamilton or New Plymouth.

[jeffref]

I have seen them at Hamilton and sort of remember a photo at Greymouth but I am getting old so that may just be memory. You can operate them off a 1200 M runway (Janes 1965-1988). Try that with a P8!

[jimtheeagle]

Remember - this is NOT a done deal. It is a statutory requirement for Congress to be notified about potential sales so they can object if the recipient has a questionable record or intentions. I seem to recall that one Gulf country (Kuwait? I can't find the info right now) was the subject of two of these notifications in the last couple of years for BOTH Super Hornets and F-15s, but had no intention of buying both types.

Some comparisons of published prices for P-8 export sales so far:
Norway is buying five for USD1.75 billion = 350 million each as of December 2016
The UK is buying nine for USD3.2 billion = 355.6 million each as of March 2016
The first 8 P-8Is for India cost USD2.1billion = 262.5 million each as of 2008*
Second proposed batch of four for India “Over USD1 billion” = 250+ million each 2016*
The proposed NZ sale is USD1.46 billion = 365 million each
I haven’t found a reliable figure for Australia yet

Norway’s sale includes 2,000 sonobouys, which are not mentioned in the other sales announcements.

Weapons are not included in any of the above. 100 Mk 54 torpedoes plus training devices and other gear cost Australia USD38 million in 2013. 20 AGM-84L Harpoon Block II missiles (plus trainers etc) cost India USD170 million in 2008.

I’m not sure why the price to NZ is so much higher than the others, especially as the price is supposed to be coming down as production increases. The specification for the Norwegian and NZ sales seems to be about the same apart from the sonobuoys.

*Info from news report rather than US govt announcement

JT

[jimtheeagle]

As for runways, I don't see a P-3K2 having any trouble using Wellington with a full load, although I don't have the figures. What are the runways the P-3s use in the Pacific? Maybe they aren't at full load there, I don't know. Of course the Orions land on the ice runways at McMurdo and I'm not aware if a P-8 has ever done that.

A reliable runway requirement figure for the P-8 is elusive, but I have seen a report suggesting that those based at Kanahoe Bay, Hawaii (2368m) would have to stage out of Hickham to carry a full load. Whenuapai’s longest runway is 2,031m,

One other data point I do have to hand, the required take-off distance for the Saab Swordfish (modified Global 6000) is 1,974m loaded. No idea on the P-1 yet.

JT

[dutchkiwi]

Apr 30, 2017 20:57:12 GMT 12 beagle said:

As for the small number, these will be supplemented with the B200/350 and maybe after that lease terminates, Airbus military might have offered us something a bit bigger and more comfortable to operate with.

Interesting thing... indeed I forgot the Raytheon Super King Air 350 family... ideal for maritime patrol duties close shore and the many island inlets. Could see work that out well...

[conman]

The Kawasaki P1 currently operates out of NAF Atsugi as its main base which has a max runway length of 2446m and of course they have already operated out of Whenuapai although probably not at MAUW, if Ohakea was extended for the Singapore F15s that would help solve the issue, otherwise maybe bring back JATO ! , you could always tweak the runway config to facilitate a rolling start, might be hard on the tires though.

[Barnsey]

Boeing publish airport planning manuals for their civil types, here: www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/plan_manuals.page

Apparently the P8 has a MTOW of 189,200 lb (85,820 kg) and 27,000 lbf engines.
The closest match (and I'm only looking for the 737 variant that's vaguely representative given that the P8 is its own variant 737-800A) using the 737-900ER (MTOW 187,700 lbs with 26,000 lbf engines, non winglet, itself a derivative of the -800) gives a takeoff runway length requirement of around 11000ft on a sea level 30 degree day. Again, absolute spitballing, but it shows the problem given Whenuapai's 6,650ft runway. Not insurmountable however!

[Barnsey]

FWIW here's where an extension to the 03 threshold would be if they extend it to 8000ft. In my opinion this is the minimum that runway should have already been extended to, as the 757 also has upload problems.


For those who aren't familiar with aircraft takeoff performance calculation, on a normal takeoff with both engines operating, a P8 at MTOW won't actually require ~11000ft of tarmac to get airborne (but it has to be available...). The figures have to account for an engine failure at V1, and provide sufficient tarmac to stop or to continue takeoff on the single remaining engine and be at 30ft over the threshold. On a 2 engine aircraft, this problem is exacerbated because you lose 50% of the available thrust if it fails (only 25% on a 4 engine aircraft). Conversely, when both are operating normally like they do 99.999% of the time, the actual takeoff run distance is under half the requirement.

[conman]

Looks like there is a reasonable development potential at the southern end of 03/21 you would just have to run the road under the runway in a tunnel, but the whining from the locals would likely be intense

[haughtney1]

Spoke at length yesterday (over a beer or 4) at the Army V Navy game to an old friend who was part of the MOD contingent who assessed the P8 v P1 with respect to it its current role and its perceived role in RAF service.
In fairly well most areas the P8 was considered the equal or better than the P1, the 2 areas interestingly where the P1 scored better was runway performance and flying handling qualities (assessed at typical mission weights)
As regards how different the P8 is to a stock 737 airframe, almost all of the major structural components are identical, even the additional ribs in the fuselage apart from a couple of new station positions come off the same line with the same batch numbers as a normal 737. All of this was deliberately done from the outset to make the airframe and it's maintenance as simple and uncomplicated as possible with stock off the shelf items.
Im of the firm opinion that if you look at the life cycle of the airframe and its capabilities, it has always been a better overall package than the P1, the MOD have ordered 8 or 9 I think and they are looking at an additional 5 in the near future.

[Barnsey]

Unsurprisingly the RAAF has foreseen the problem and is extending RAAF Edinburgh's runway to 9500ft, as well as building a new squadron ops and maintenance facility. I'm in no doubt the RNZAF project team are all over it as well.

[Dave Homewood]

How about building up the end of the runway into a ski ramp?

[htbrst]

I'd give the KC-46 a reasonable chance as the 757 replacement, particularly if outsize loads are covered directly by the C-130 replacement. While the air-to-air refuelling capability would be a bonus in the scheme of things, it would also give the option of topping up P-8 tanks after take off on the occasions a full load is required

[Calum]

Apr 30, 2017 12:24:04 GMT 12 Dinga said:

Well that's me shot down in flames thankyou Mr Errol C.Sounds like we have a real crisis on our hands according to you.I would lay odds five squadron could keep those P3s flying if they had to which is their job.So what if I said something that's already been covered,no harm in refreshing peoples memorys mate.It would seem there is no suitable replacement for an orion except another Orion.If the p8 is not up to search and rescue then its a waste of space.

When I was in the RNZAF, SAR was not a core role for the defence force, it was an extra. The defence force is (AFAIK) is there to defend the natiosn interest, in worst case scenarios this may mean killing people, hence why the P-8 is a good choice...

It's sad that most people seem to think that's all the MPA fleet is for is SAR

[Calum]

The P 1 is an orphan with all the logistical issues that'll bring.

The P-8 has been ordered by a larger number of countries and based on the what is probably most successful twin engine passenger jet ever built, one that has millions of hours in the air and 1000's of frames still flying... It's a no brainer for mine

[Dave Homewood]

May 1, 2017 12:55:18 GMT 12 Barnsey said:

FWIW here's where an extension to the 03 threshold would be if they extend it to 8000ft. In my opinion this is the minimum that runway should have already been extended to, as the 757 also has upload problems.

Unfortunately, and probably quite typical of the lack of thinking in the modern work, it looks like that land is being "developed" right now, if this on One News is anything to go by, as that area is where the Boeing B-17 crashed!

www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/were-very-conscious-any-human-remains-archaeologists-search-hidden-site-new-zealand-aircraft-disaster?auto=5415994981001