Royal New Zealand Air Force

C

contedicavour

New Member
PeterH said:
Just a teoretical question:
If the MB-339 could get target datas from another source (P-3 or Frigate) would it be possible to use them as a weapons carrier and launch an anti-shipping missile (Harpoon). Besides the need for some data-link to get the target data to the missile is it possible regarding weight of the missile and ground-clearance of the aircraft?
Click to expand...
I don't know about Harpoon but our MB-339CD do precisely that with Marte Mk2A ASM. Normally a AB212 or a P166 or a ATR-72 provide initial target identification and pass over data to the MB339s for a missile launch.
Of course it's simpler if there is a EH-101 in the area since it can just launch the Marte without external help...

cheers
 
P

PeterH

New Member
Thanks for the information. If the systems already are in use only the question about the lifting capacity of the MB339 remains.

I see the point with the EH-101 but if the target is an advanced ship I believe you need many missiles to "swamp" the defences and I suppose it´s takes less time to collect a force of jets.

Cheers
 
D

dave_kiwi

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
PeterH said:
Sounds like a dangerous option for the P-3. What kind of targets were these Zuni-rockets intended to be used against: patrol-boats?

5 Sqn continue to train with 500 lb "depth-bombs". As I understand it their supposed to be used against sub-marines in shallow water.

Cheers
Click to expand...
"Japanese Whalers" if Green Peace had their way ....:eek:nfloorl:

Seriously I think the only think they were ever used against were the targets at the Kaipara range -- more a relic from the late 50 / 60's .... though they would certainly get a boat's attention.

On the RNZAF site, there was an article last year about P3-Ks dropping MK 82s at the Kaipara range -- thinking along those lines, the laser guided bomb kits brought for A4 use could be used ..... what with external marking from a ground team (SAS ?) you could use these quite effectivily in the South Pacific region -- no real SAM threat, come in at 10000 feet ....
and wham .. Mk 82 or whatever on ya head......

Not sure how many a P3-K could carry, but it would be more than 2 :p:

As a matter of opinion, I would think a P3-K carrying 4 x MK 82 in bomb bay would be faster (given that it can "do" around 400 knots if it really needs to) than a A4 with the equivalent bomb load plus drop tanks ...

Just imagine it ..
 
Last edited:
P

PeterH

New Member
dave_kiwi said:
"In the RNZAF site, there was an article last year about P3-Ks dropping MK 82s at the Kaipara range -- thinking along those lines, the laser guided bomb kits brought for A4 use could be used ..... what with external marking from a ground team (SAS ?) you could use these quite effectivily in the South Pacific region -- no real SAM threat, come in at 10000 feet ....
and wham .. Mk 82 or whatever on ya head......

Not sure how many a P3-K could carry, but it would be more than 2 :p:
Click to expand...
A good idea but unfortunately the P-3s can not to use these kind of intelligent weapons today. Something with the wiring...
 
K

KH-12

Member
PeterH said:
A good idea but unfortunately the P-3s can not to use these kind of intelligent weapons today. Something with the wiring...
Click to expand...
I am sure if there was a will it would'nt be impossible to integrate the required wiring, maybe as part of the current refit process, I imagine you would configure for GPS guided munitions eg SDB, the Orion bomb bay should be able to hold a few of these :) Laser guided weapons bit restrictive when dropping from high altitude in cloudy environments.
 
P

PeterH

New Member
KH-12 said:
I am sure if there was a will it would'nt be impossible to integrate the required wiring, maybe as part of the current refit process, I imagine you would configure for GPS guided munitions eg SDB, the Orion bomb bay should be able to hold a few of these :) Laser guided weapons bit restrictive when dropping from high altitude in cloudy environments.
Click to expand...
What I have seen in other posts this wiring is needed if an anti-shipping missile should be included in the armament of the P-3. Maybe it´s included in project running now.
 
K

KH-12

Member
PeterH said:
What I have seen in other posts this wiring is needed if an anti-shipping missile should be included in the armament of the P-3. Maybe it´s included in project running now.
Click to expand...
I think the problems previously highlighted related to wing mounted Harpoon missles, retrofitting wiring through a wing is more complex than fuselage configuration.
 
W

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
KH-12 said:
I think the problems previously highlighted related to wing mounted Harpoon missles, retrofitting wiring through a wing is more complex than fuselage configuration.
Click to expand...
I have this feeling that wiring is standard, it is the fire control, software etc where we run into problems...

Although I stand to be corrected on this.
 
W

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
Turk said:
Are P-3K has got different specfictions except regular P-3C Orion ?
Click to expand...
Most countries P-3s differ from the USN's basic P-3C, as I think many of the USN's probably do.

Between different build specs and various upgrades there is bound to be a lot of differences.
 
Todjaeger

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Whiskyjack said:
Most countries P-3s differ from the USN's basic P-3C, as I think many of the USN's probably do.

Between different build specs and various upgrades there is bound to be a lot of differences.
Click to expand...
There are actually different versions of the P-3C itself, before getting into variants used by different nations.

The original P-3C (IIRC from late '60s), then there was P-3C Update I, later there was th P-3C Update II. The NZ P-3K Orion is a variant update of the P-3C Update II. There were additional variants for the P-3C Update 2.5, and then Update III. These variants are (or were) used by the USN. Another update of the P-3C, is the AP-3C Orion used by the RAAF, which has (again, IIRC) the mission computers of the S-3 Viking for ASW. These computers were (are?) more advanced than the normal P-3C ASW system computers.

It will be interesting to see what the P-8A MMA will be capable of, given the leap in technologies from when the P-3 made it's appearance.

-Cheers
 
G

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
Okay - I started this thread to gauge feedback on whether the MB-339's could be used for other than just training Army & Navy units, given that the NZ opposition defence spokesman has raised the possibility.

Thanks for the feedback - I'm still convinced they could be deployed to places like East Timor then operated for recon & light-attack etc - but I guess there isn't a dire need for this fairly limited type of capability in the region - especially given that the P-3K's will soon be capable of doing much of this tasking.

Okay so their true worth will remain as trainers for Army & Navy units. Perhaps some limited 'domestic defence' use as well - although I'm not even really sure they'd be worth the effort or cost!

Maybe National should look at maximising their training function - and perhaps 'make some money' by setting up a jet-training school open to regional or allied airforces to enable pilots to gain some serious mountain & low flying experience. What about a forward-air-control 'centre-of excellence'!?!...or am I again fishing for reasons to justify the MB-339's retention!?!
 
W

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
Gibbo said:
Okay so their true worth will remain as trainers for Army & Navy units. Perhaps some limited 'domestic defence' use as well - although I'm not even really sure they'd be worth the effort or cost!
Click to expand...
If they were to fly in the primary training role and if the RNZAF still had some AIM-9L/Ms in service there is no reason they could not be used for a CAP role should it ever be deemed needed (APEC etc...).



Lots of maybes there tho
 
G

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
Todjaeger said:
There are actually different versions of the P-3C itself, before getting into variants used by different nations.

The original P-3C (IIRC from late '60s), then there was P-3C Update I, later there was th P-3C Update II. The NZ P-3K Orion is a variant update of the P-3C Update II. There were additional variants for the P-3C Update 2.5, and then Update III. These variants are (or were) used by the USN. Another update of the P-3C, is the AP-3C Orion used by the RAAF, which has (again, IIRC) the mission computers of the S-3 Viking for ASW. These computers were (are?) more advanced than the normal P-3C ASW system computers.

It will be interesting to see what the P-8A MMA will be capable of, given the leap in technologies from when the P-3 made it's appearance.

-Cheers
Click to expand...
RNZAF first five were originally P3B's - in what is known as a 'lightweight' configuration - can't remember what exactly that meant but it was airframe related & gave them a lower max weight. The 6th P-3K was an RAAF P3B but was in standard 'heavy' configuration - not sure if that point of difference still remains after the 'wing' replacement' upgrade a few years back.
 
K

KH-12

Member
How about selling flights for the public as a means of part funding the operating costs as per the Russians experience, not sure what the charge out rate would be, anyone know the fuel burn on the Viper engine ? :D
 
K

KH-12

Member
Whiskyjack said:
If they were to fly in the primary training role and if the RNZAF still had some AIM-9L/Ms in service there is no reason they could not be used for a CAP role should it ever be deemed needed (APEC etc...).



Lots of maybes there tho
Click to expand...
It would be cheaper to rig up a gun pack (maybe 20mm) as I would'nt expect any target intercepted to be manouvering too wildly, not sure they were ever properly configured for AIM-9 firing
 
D

dave_kiwi

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Lightweight vs heavy weight -- from memory I think this referred to the wings

The P3-Ks were the first 'B" models produced ( prior to Rigel update) .. and as such, had "A" model wings. This was one of the reasons I believe that a more advance ECM fit in the wing tips wasn't carried out, and also was one of the limiting factors in "under wing stores" ala harpoon

Interestingly enough, RNZAF C-130s were the first "H" models produced, "E" wings with "H" bodies .

Of course with the Kestrel project, any limitation on the wings has been removed :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top