P-8A Poseidon and the Future of ASW

[Keven]

Hey this is my first post on the forum here so please forgive me if I'm not that familiar with all the norms, I will try to get better. An area of concern for me seems to be the degradation of USN ASW capabilities in the years since the Cold War ended. This seems to be evidenced by the recent retirement of the S-3B without replacement and the fact that a French SSN and leased Swedish diesel-electric bout managed to "sink" US CVNs in exercises. The fact that a Chinese SSN managed to surface within several thousand yards of a strike group some years back without being decected before surfacing is also reason for alarm especially considering the increased emphasis the US is putting of confronting China.

One of the biggest problems I see, however, is that the P-8A Poseidon, the future replacement for the P-3 Orion will not be equiped with a magnetic annomely detector (MAD) in order to save weight and will instead be equipped with a new system designed to detect fumes from diesel-electric subs (doesn't seem like that could detect SSNs or even diesel boats when running on batteries). Granted my knowledge of these systems is limited but I would like to hear what someone who is more informed on the issue has to say. Will the fume detector and sonabouies be sufficient to conduct ASW?

Thank you for your input.

Sorry i meant to write P-8A not A-8A (typo)

Mod edit: Merged posts and title correction
-Preceptor

 

[moahunter]

^do you have a source for this? A change from below?

CAE. Advanced integrated magnetic anomaly detection (MAD) System, used to find submarines by the magnetic anomalies that much metal creates.

P-8 Poseidon MMA: Long-Range Maritime Patrol, and More

 

[recce.k1]

There was an interesting discussion on airliners.net a couple of years ago about the (lack of) MAD v the advantages of sonobouys (would be good to get some updated DT defpro comments if poss).
P-8 Poseidon Without Magnetic Anomaly Detection — Military Forum | Airliners.net

 

[Sea Toby]

Times have changed and many things have been reinvented smaller and better. Just because I don't see an old television antennae on your roof does not mean you don't have television. You could be wired with cable or have a satellite dish. Those of us who have new flat screen high definition televisions don't have a bloop tube either, many of us choosing the new LED LCDs...

The P-3 Orions were basically updated 1950s technology.... The sonar buoys have always been the key to finding submarines, not the very short range MAD... The MAD was like using a toy magnet to find a needle in a haystack...

Instead of losing ASW capabilities, the Poseidons increase ASW capabilities significantly....

 

[colay]

One also has to factor in the effectiveness of the sub's degaussing tech.. perhaps MAD may still serve a purpose or maybe it isn't as effective as it used to be?

 

[rand0m]

Can someone please confirm the range of the Poseidon aircraft? I've been reading it's 1200nm compared to 4800nm of the Orion's, seems like a massive reduction. Am I missing something?

 

[Sea Toby]

Can someone please confirm the range of the Poseidon aircraft? I've been reading it's 1200nm compared to 4800nm of the Orion's, seems like a massive reduction. Am I missing something?

From Wiki: Poseidon Range: 1,200 nmi (2,222 km) 4 hours on station

From Wiki: Orion Range: 4,830 nmi ferry (8,944 km)

There is a big difference between ferry range and operational range with 4 hours on station.... I am certain the Orion's operational range with 4 hours on station isn't its ferry range...

The Boeing 737-700 family from Wiki have a range fully loaded: 3,050–5,510 nmi (5,650–10,200 km; 3,510–6,340 mi). The ER versions have much more range than the non ER versions. Of course the Poseidon isn't a ER version of the aircraft family...

So a fully loaded normal 737 probably has a ferry range of 3,050 nautical miles, if not more as a Poseidon isn't as heavy as a full load of paying passengers... Airlines are using Boeing 737s to fly from the west coast of the USA to the east coast in the vicinity of 3,000 miles fully loaded with passengers...

The US Navy website claims the Orion has a maximum mission radius: 2380 nautical miles, uncertain for how long on station... Probably not much considering the Orion's ferry range...

 

[LGB]

The P-8A can fly out 1200nm and patrol 4 hours and then fly back to base. The P-3's ferry range (one way) is 4800nm. The P-3 can fly for 12 hours. It's not clear exactly what the endurance of the P-8A will be but it's not going to be significantly less. The P-8A will often offer more time on station given it's cruise speed is about 50% better than the P-3.

Can someone please confirm the range of the Poseidon aircraft? I've been reading it's 1200nm compared to 4800nm of the Orion's, seems like a massive reduction. Am I missing something?

 

[gf0012-aust]

I've been to a few official briefs on the P8, unfort unable to comment on stats.

the public stats however are a bit off the mark.

I initially had my doubts on using a converted passenger jet for some of the roles, but have been absolutely gobsmacked at its capability.

I can't wait to see them trundling down the tarmac at edinburgh in 6 years time...

 

[gf0012-aust]

One also has to factor in the effectiveness of the sub's degaussing tech.. perhaps MAD may still serve a purpose or maybe it isn't as effective as it used to be?

degaussing isn't going to do much to help....

bad assumption on the capability of MAD based tech...

 

[colay]

degaussing isn't going to do much to help....

bad assumption on the capability of MAD based tech...

Interesting.

 

[ASSAIL]

Sonar buoys/systems are primary search sensors amongst other things. MAD is an attack locating sensor therefor the two should not be compared on an either or basis.
I'm sure that technology has improved and more sophisticated sensors have been found since my time. Mad was always quite a crude sensor

 

[Lostfleet]

I really wonder about future of ASW, or in fact the whole naval warfare,

During Cold War, P-3s were positioned all around the Northen Atlantic as well as Northern Pacific where a convoy war similar to 2nd World War was expected between NATO and Warsaw Pact,

Currently I can see Russian submarines be a target for P-8 patrols as well as Chinese and North Korean subs, but besides now I assume they would be in limited regions.

Will we see P-8s fly-off patrols from Canada, Iceland, Norway, UK, Azores, Japan, Phillipines and other foreign bases ( I try to list P-3 locations during cold-war from my memory)

or what would be their new arena for anti-sub patrols?

 

[kaman]

I find it interesting that someone mentioned the P-8 will be equipped with a device for detecting diesel fumes from a submarine. Ironically, the P-2 Neptune was equipped with a similar device called a "Sniffer". My understanding is that it wasn't very reliable or accurate, however, much of the problems with MAD was the training of the operators. Without proper training the ASQ-81 for example had almost a 65% false contact rate.

 

[OldGoat]

Sniffer

When I was in graduate school (early 1990s) one of my classmates was working on a neutron trail detector. This may be what is really be installed on the P-8.

 

[ngatimozart]

When I was in graduate school (early 1990s) one of my classmates was working on a neutron trail detector. This may be what is really be installed on the P-8.

I would presume that is for tracking nuke boats. However gas chromographs are getting smaller and more accurate so maybe a modern version of the old Neptune sniffer for diesel fumes from snorting subs.

 

[ASSAIL]

degaussing isn't going to do much to help....

bad assumption on the capability of MAD based tech...

Will the future RAAF P8's be fitted with the Canadian CAE-MAD AN?ASQ 508A or are they to get the Polotamic Multi Mode Magnetic Detection System - 3MDS - AN ASQ-233 polotomic.com/applications/airborneapps.html which I understand is suitable for both UAV and helos as well as P 8

Can anyone give any info on the capability of the systems vis a vis the older generation MAD?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Will the future RAAF P8's be fitted with the Canadian CAE-MAD AN?ASQ 508A or are they to get the Polotamic Multi Mode Magnetic Detection System - 3MDS - AN ASQ-233 polotomic.com/applications/airborneapps.html which I understand is suitable for both UAV and helos as well as P 8

Can anyone give any info on the capability of the systems vis a vis the older generation MAD?

The proposed fitouts are still classified - although they have been "aired" internally on a KtK basis

 

[rip]

From Wiki: Poseidon Range: 1,200 nmi (2,222 km) 4 hours on station

From Wiki: Orion Range: 4,830 nmi ferry (8,944 km)

There is a big difference between ferry range and operational range with 4 hours on station.... I am certain the Orion's operational range with 4 hours on station isn't its ferry range...

The Boeing 737-700 family from Wiki have a range fully loaded: 3,050–5,510 nmi (5,650–10,200 km; 3,510–6,340 mi). The ER versions have much more range than the non ER versions. Of course the Poseidon isn't a ER version of the aircraft family...

So a fully loaded normal 737 probably has a ferry range of 3,050 nautical miles, if not more as a Poseidon isn't as heavy as a full load of paying passengers... Airlines are using Boeing 737s to fly from the west coast of the USA to the east coast in the vicinity of 3,000 miles fully loaded with passengers...

The US Navy website claims the Orion has a maximum mission radius: 2380 nautical miles, uncertain for how long on station... Probably not much considering the Orion's ferry range...

When they decided many years ago to stop development of unducted Fan (UDF) or propfan for the ASW requirement, it led to the problem. Turbo fan jet engines are not very efficient when operating at low altitude where the old turbo prop P-3C operates. At altitude the P-8 is more efficient and it is quicker to get to a contact but it doesn’t have the loiter capacity of an unducted fan or turbo prop. The main reason that the P-8 doesn’t have MAD is that even when presuming an engagement, it will not be flying low enough for it to work very well.

The big different between the Indian requirement which has a MAD device is that they will be operating their P-8’s close to their own coasts while all of the US operations will be far from its coasts, so rang it not as important to the Indians’.

The Unducted fan engine is once again being developed after being shelved for many years because of its greater fuel economy but they could not justify its development at the time, Millions and Millions and Millions for a purely small run military requirement.

When the unducted Fan (UDF) finally finds its way into a long range narrow body civilian type air-craft it will not be long before, whoever comes up with it with it, that an ASW version will also be offered but the P-3 fleet is worn out and needs to be replaced now so they are making do with the technology that is available.



[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propfan"]Propfan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[ASSAIL]

Thanks for that explanation. The Indian purchase of the Canadian MAD makes sense with what you have said but the statement (wiki) that India is only the second nation after the US to buy it is at odds with the above.