USN Another call to "bring back S-3's" (Vikings are Zombies)

[Gatordev]

Tangential, but a test pilot at VX-23 was made the project officer for the evaluation on the OV-10's capability to do the Navy's intended mission. What a cool project that would have been!

To me and my knowledge of aviation history this has a lot of parallels to the Air Force procuring retired Navy A-1's and making that platform superb in its intended mission. It is possible, despite the good idea fairies.

It all was part of a much bigger set of evaluations and operational uses. One that one of our (former?) Mods/members was part of. As someone that was lucky enough to be invited to be a fly on the wall for a VERY small part of it, it was all interesting stuff.

 

[ChuckMK23]

On a similar thread I was just reading how strong the AIP P-3’s are still going - perhaps this is the airframe that never really gets retired.

 

[scoolbubba]

On a similar thread I was just reading how strong the AIP P-3’s are still going - perhaps this is the airframe that never really gets retired.

View attachment 18678

Yea, that's a crock of shit.

Aircraft are already old and showing their age by routinely breaking in ways we never planned for or expected.

These things are getting to be downright dangerous to fly. The only thing that keeps them airborne is the fact they were mondo-over engineered in the 50s and that we ask our maintainers to routinely produce miracles with insufficient supplies and time.

Corrosion in structural members is rampant across the fleet, multiple props were reworked incorrectly at Warner Robbins, and opportunities for proficiency are drastically reduced. Anything to the contrary you read or see is #fakenews propaganda.

 

[wlawr005]

Yea, that's a crock of shit.

Aircraft are already old and showing their age by routinely breaking in ways we never planned for or expected.

These things are getting to be downright dangerous to fly. The only thing that keeps them airborne is the fact they were mondo-over engineered in the 50s and that we ask our maintainers to routinely produce miracles with insufficient supplies and time.

Corrosion in structural members is rampant across the fleet, multiple props were reworked incorrectly at Warner Robbins, and opportunities for proficiency are drastically reduced. Anything to the contrary you read or see is #fakenews propaganda.

You could literally be talking about any platform in the Navy except maybe -60R/S and P-8

 

[Treetop Flyer]

You could literally be talking about any platform in the Navy except maybe -60R/S and P-8

But the P-8 may be the only other platform that can trace its engineering to the 50’s

 

[jmcquate]

Lockheed Electra

 

[Griz882]

The OV-10s belonged (and still do) to NASA, and were loaned to the Navy and flown by active duty Naval Aviators. And it wasn’t Afghanistan they deployed to. But I agree it’s not really an example of a platform being resurrected - it was two aircraft with no practical ability to bring more online.

Almost. They did go to Afghanistan, Iraq and even the Philippines. All the deployments were part of a SOC effort. According to the SOC brief they (with USN and USMC crews) flew over 120 missions. But I do agree that two or three isn’t really a resurrection.

 

[scoolbubba]

But the P-8 may be the only other platform that can trace its engineering to the 50’s

I love how we fawn over it like it's new technology.

You're exactly right. The logical genesis for the 737 is the 727, a design that flew just 3 years after the L-188. If you want to be pedantic and limit it to only 737 variants, the brand new P-8's evolutionary grand-daddy first flew in...drumroll please...1967.

State of the art!

That being said, I do think most of the acquisition success you see with the P-8 and the other 737 derivative military aircraft stems directly from the proven, highly-evolved design. There aren't a ton of airframe bugs left after 50 years. The P-8 is a pigged out 737 stuffed full of vintage software that was developed, broken, redeveloped, and still broken on the P-3. There isn't much clean sheet stuff in it; even the broke-dick rotary launchers are stolen from the Brits.

The question is, does she have the legs to make it another 40 years in Uncle Sugar's service until skynet runs the world?

 

[CommodoreMid]

Actually we stole the Brits version of the rotary which was gravity based and worked well and then had the good idea to add 5000 psi to it. Because compressors never break.

 

[nittany03]

I love how we fawn over it like it's new technology.

You're exactly right. The logical genesis for the 737 is the 727, a design that flew just 3 years after the L-188. If you want to be pedantic and limit it to only 737 variants, the brand new P-8's evolutionary grand-daddy first flew in...drumroll please...1967.

State of the art!

But they’ve been built a lot more recently than that. And flown a lot less flight hours. I mean, come on. I’m not going to pretend to be credible enough to speak to the mission systems, but as far as the basic airframe goes, how much earth-shattering engineering can you do to a tube with wings? There’s a reason it and the A320 look so similar. They have the same job, leading to the same requirements, leading to any engineer worth their salt saying “why reinvent the wheel?”

 

[Swanee]

they (with USN and USMC crews) flew over 120 missions.

Those dudes are/were some happy mother F'ers. I met a couple of them on the flight line at Oceana (as a RAG stud). I wandered over to their part of the ramp and introduced myself- curious about the program. They didn't say much, but they were dudes with long hair wearing flight suits with a patch that had their NA wings and callsign, and brown boots. As a young cone I was speaking to Gods among men. They loved their job and their little airplane. After talking with them I was ready to say, "F the Hornet, I want to be a Combat Dragon guy".

 

[wink]

Not a full on call for zombie Vikings, but some worthy nostalgia and Jerry Hendrix. Hey gotta take the good with the bad.

 

[Jim123]

Not a full on call for zombie Vikings, but some worthy nostalgia and Jerry Hendrix. Hey gotta take the good with the bad.

When are we going to get a drone CAG?

 

[Brett327]

Not a full on call for zombie Vikings, but some worthy nostalgia and Jerry Hendrix. Hey gotta take the good with the bad.

"The MK-48 Harpoon missile"

 

[BarryD]

I thought Jerry Hendrix was more concerned with creating an A-6/X-47 lovechild.