Future of the P-3 and EP-3???

[skywiz]

Hello,

I am curious what the future of the P-3 and EP-3 is? Reason I ask is I am in advanced multi right now and need to decide which airframe to go in a couple of months. I heard that the P-3 community is in danger of going away possibly?

Also heard that the EP-3 is going to be replaced by Gulfstreams?

Also, which is better Whidbey or Brunswick to get stationed? Anyone been to Rota?

Thanks for any responses!

 

[pilotyip]

P-3 future

The P-3 will be around for a number of years, from what I here their mission is changing and the role of the reserves, But there is no airframe tagged to replace the airplane for at least the next 4-5 years and you would be able to finish your first tour and have other options in the future. Rota is great or at least it was in the 70's and 80's, We got to see most of the Med, RON's in Greece, Italy, Germany, England at that time it had a great club, Malaga was easy to get to, nice country around the base.

 

[LR25]

Great, more boeings.

A P-3 will be better than any 737, and almost as fast with a few more engines.

 

[P3tarbaby]

Future of the P-3...

The P-3 community is in a bit of caos right now because Lockheed came out a couple of months ago and said "oops, we calculated the fatige life of the airframes wrong!" This is under investigation but in the mean time a lot of planes have had to be parked. There is a bunch of wheelin' and dealin' between the reserves and the active duty over airplanes and that is stiring the pot as well. If the fatigue life issue is valid, we could lose a lot of airplanes.

The follow on airplane to the P-3 is called MMA (multi-mission aircraft) but who is going to build it hasn't been decided. The three finalist are Boeing with a 737 variant, Lockheed-Martin with an updated P-3, and British Aerospace with a Nimrod variant. The front runner has been Boeing with the 737 but that may change is the fatigue life problem isn't fixed because they won't be able to deliver until sometime after 2010 which may be too late. In this case, Lockheed-Martin probably has the best shot since the P-3 is already a proven product. (I'm speculating here). The final decision is supposed to be made next summer.

Right now the P-3 and EP-3 are controlled by one wing commander but I have heard rumors that they may go their seperate ways for a follow-on airframe so the gulfstream rumor may be correct. As Jim said, P-3s are in high demand by theater commanders, but mostly for recon and targeting with the lack of a submarine threat.

Bottom line, there will be a VP community in the future, but it probably won't look like it does today. There is a lot of talk about the reserves going to a augment unit concept and forward presents of deployed units being reduced. Right now it is all discussion and probably won't be firmed up for a year or two.

Hope this helps.

 

[LR25]

A buddy of mine worked for Lockheed Martin in ATL on the C-130J, he told me (back in 97) that there were plans for an updated P-3, called the P-3 2000, it didnt happen obviously, but I wonder if it will finally happen now?

 

[firstthird]

Not to mention the Laraca and the P-7 that also didn't happen. These are interesting times in the P-3 community, hopefully the Navy comes up with a viable solution.

It would be pretty ironic if Boeing gets denied due to a 2010-2012 first delivery date (which has been a pretty constant requirement for at least the last 5 or 8 years) and Lockheed gets it due to the original product not meeting its intended life expectancy.

I can see the conversation now "Oops, sorry that plane we built thirty years ago timed out a little early, too early for Boeing to deliver you say? Well, have no fear, Lockheed has you covered."

Besides, Boeing is about to get big bucks for the tanker replacement for the Air Force to "lease" 767s for 10 years for 90% of purchase price. Hey, can I buy a car like that.

Me "So the car costs 30 grand to buy it today, or I can pay 27 grand and give it back to you in 5 years?"(5 since a car lasts about 15 whereas a plane should last 30)
Dealer "that's right, what a deal."
Me "And you say after I'm done with it I pay the cost to covert it back to its standard configuration"
Dealer "yep, nobody else wants that refueling nonsense."
me "I'll take it, I'm made of money."

 

[jergar999]

I can't imagine an airplane that has won a dogfight with a jet, with the autopilot engaged being phased out.

 

[46Driver]

PatMack,
I think he is talking about the mid-air between the MIG and the P-3 last year (2 years ago?). P-3 survived but landed in Chinese hands, the MIG was splashed.

 

[jergar999]

It was just a joke about the incident in China. They are neat planes, I would love the chance to fly one.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

My buddies are telling me there are rumors of scaling back the number of squadrons. They did this in the early 90's. In fact, they cut the number of squadrons in half. The FRS backed way up and there was a period of time in 94 that P-3s were the hardest pipeline to select. I'd say if the RAG is squeezing the flow, that would be more of the reason than the aircraft service life problem. It's also possible that part of the reasoning involved in reducing the number of squadrons can be attibuted to service life also. Regardless, the need for long-range maritime patrol will never go away. Still the best sea duty in the navy!