I just can't imagine going from a glass cockpit/HUD aircraft to the COD. I flew the T-2C in VT-4 and that was a step up from the C-2 (barely). The COD is such a ****ing piece of crap in today's aviation world. It's a good job to have, just a pain in the ass to fly.
There is an upgrade waiting to be funded but what are we upgrading? You can only polish a turd so far. If the C-2B is funded, the timeline met, a new airplane should be on the flightline in 2017 :icon_slee
What about for the E-2C? I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere about upgrades in the cockpit to include glass cockpits. Also something about the second pilot being able to perform some of the same duties that the guys in the tube are doing by bringing up some of the same displays to the cockpit. How far is the community away from this or is this bogus info?
Isn't that Hawkeye 2000? I thought I've seen pictures of E-2C with glass cockpits. The "navy vision" has an E-2D in it.
Yup, the HE2K has glass. And as for the E-2D... no need or desire for the proposed refueling probe, but I guess it will be sweet justice when the Super Tanker uses all its advanced avionics and weapons/extra fuel tanks to top me off for another 5 hours of circles. Oh joy!
I would sh!t myself if they started a C stud class in Kingsville in Jan...ain't happenin. There are only like 10 total C jets....unless they arrive in droves, or we steal some from Meridian and we get more than one sim that doesn't freeze after 45 min of use...I would say summer '06 at the earliest...but thats just me pissing in the wind...
Not to ressurect an old thread, but what's the life in general like in an E-2 squadron (specifically for NFO's)? Things like flying time, collateral duties, wardrooms, deployments etc... Thanks, Bubba
Honestly, no diff than any other platform. Some things are universal...start out w/ small jobs, work on your crew quals, eventually get your mission commander qual, get better JO jobs. You see guys slinging mud at each other (good-natured) from the pilot-NFO angle but everyone gets along and hangs out just fine. Lots of fun, and you typically have more in your ready room than any other platform (~25). Flying time is as seen fit by Ops and Training to get you qual'ed and keep you current/proficient (not necessarily the same thing). You'll typically fly every day on deployment as an E-2 NFO - not a bad thing. All in all, it's a good life.
The E-2D is coming with a refueling probe. So get ready to take a leak and/or a crap in your seat in the next version. At least in the P-3 we had a bucket.
Never used the bucket and flew plenty of 12 hr hops in the P-3 without using the can either. You guys should learn to go before you leave the house.
Yeah, what is wrong with people? I do, however, know a couple folks who have moved their bowels in the Prowler - Navbag anyone? Brett
Well, I'll say this. Never say you're never going to go in the plane, cause sure as..well, you know...you'll need to (hmm...that wilted lettuce salad and mystery meat burrito at lunch doesn't seem like such a good idea now, does it). The smart man carries a plastic bag folded up in his vest and a strategic stash of TP in his helmet bag. Not that you'd need it, but hey - you never know.
I didn't try your link but I can guess the thread....it is one of the few worth reading over there.....enjoy
Hey all, first post, just found the website. Pissing is no worries in the E-2. Both pilots have relief tubes and the NFO's are just careful not to "rub" on the shared one in the back. Ladies are another story. I know they're doing work at PAX river getting a Rhino to "give" to a Hawkeye. KC10/KC135's are out, that leaves Rhino's and KC130's. Anybody? I thought they were putting it on because of the max-cat weight restrictions. The E-2D is a lot heavier than the "C". They weren't going to be able to give the "D" as much fuel as the "C", hence the need to tank to maintain the current on-station times. It does make sense for the safety factor or coming back to the ship low on gas... take a squirt and be safe. But as for extending missions... Would you trust a controller who'd been at it for eight hours? There's a lot more research that need to go into this thing before anybody worries about the probe being used to extend mission times.
Now I'm no aerodynamic engineer, but how did "they" allow that kind of a situation to develop? Operational hazards due to longer missions aside, it seems just plain innefficient for a Hornet to have to launch, pass gass, and recover, just to keep the E-2D aloft for its normal mission duration.
I should have asked a question instead. Why is the E-2D heavier? (Will look around for the answer in the meantime...) EDIT: Internet says its got another NFO in the tube + more/larger sensors (bigger engines?). MY recomendation? Build a new aircraft that can carry all the gadgets and personel, and not have to take "sips" for its normal mission duraction; have the probe as the exception, not the rule to operations. HOWEVER, this is the real world, with $$$. SO, I'm just going to assume its cheaper to have an Hornet pass gas than it is to build/implement "my" new airframe.
Ok... out of curiosity... why are the KC-10/135's a no-go for refueling the E-2D's? As a guess, I'm gonna get even more specific on the question and ask is it a speed issue?
If they Navy builds the C-2B, it will be a future tanker for the boat. It is going to be designed to carry drop tanks and the ability to refuel other aircraft (and take gas as I understand it).
The new radar will add more weight. Ultimately it comes down to max launch/trap weights. It's really no different than heavy strikes launching with less gas to increase the bomb load weight and then tanking airborne to top off. The D will not have an extra NFO in the tube. Rumors of having a 4th operator position at the copilot station, but no word as to whether it'll be a pilot or NFO. Personally, I'd rather have the 2nd pilot.
