I have a few questions about the EA-6B. First, how much longer is the navy gonna be flying prowlers? Second, is this new E-18 G going to be able to fill the shoes of the prowler? And finally, how hard is it to land on the carrier (correct me if im wrong but i thought that the prowler's engines dont provide instantaneous response to power corrections)?
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Prowlers
- Thread starter myoun023
- Start date
- Status
Well, I think the Growler won't be coming online until 2008+, probably more like 2010. Someone please correct me on that if I'm wrong. As far as landing on a carrier, well it's essentially the only legacy jet we have left in our inventory. The Hornet can land itself, if need be. However, I'm not a boat pilot, just a Primary dude, so I'll wait until a Prowler guy can speak to that. As far as instantaneous response, no turbine engine is instantaneous. You'll find that out in Primary when you do touch and gos. Hit max PCL, wait a second, and WHAM back in the seat. Mmmmmm.
myoun023 said:
I have no answer for your Prowler question but there might be a Prowler NFO type on this board who could help you. As for your second question, I don't believe any aircraft other than the E-2 and C-2 provide instant power response (props always at 100% rpm). That's why when we get behind the power curve, get low and get the power call, it's a bit easier for us to get out of a bad situation. It's one of the few plus items we have as prop guys/gals flying to the boat.
From what I've heard about prowlers, the slow spool-up time plus the long distance from the hookpoint to the cockpit combine to make it difficult to land on the boat.
Granted, I've never landed an aircraft on a carrier (yet), but that seems to be the word floating around the jet VTs
/feel free to dissect
Granted, I've never landed an aircraft on a carrier (yet), but that seems to be the word floating around the jet VTs
/feel free to dissect
Dunedan said:
no
those are speedbrakes on the wingtips. several jets land at the boat with the boards out. that way, they have to have the engine spooled up higher so it has a faster response. you don't modulate the boards on approach.
From idle to 75% throttle response is sluggish but running at or above 75% it's just as quick as both FA18's. Will the FA18-G be as good as the Prowler? No. Put simply there has to be some compromise when you use one airframe to do multiple missions. The fact is that the Prowler is a very old airframe and most of the fleet is G limited to try and extend the life of the remaining birds. The pig is a good jet but it's very maintenance intensive averaging 10+ maintenance hours to every flight hour.
Clux4
Banned
Speaking to a friend that works at Pax. Md. According to him, the Growlers cannot go out for too long. Most of the available pods for fuel(drop-tanks) have been used for electronic systmes thereby reducing operational time. Their only option is going out with tankers to refuel.
I really don't see them in service until about 2010. This is like building an aircraft from the scratch.
I really don't see them in service until about 2010. This is like building an aircraft from the scratch.
The EA-18 will start being delievered in 2007 and will deploy in 2009, that is the plan right now. If you know anything about government procurement, I would not be suprised if that slipped a little to the right. In that 2 year time they will stand up the RAG and start training crews. The complete change from EA-6B to EA-18 is suppose to be done in 2012.
As for the name, there was a lot of grumbling in VAQ because of "scatological connotations" as it was delicately put by Navy Times. They had a panel of guys from the RAG to come up with suggestions for a new name, Mongoose was a popular one (associated with the Wild Weasel Hunter-killer role). And as for the designation, I have yet to see anything definitive, whether it is EA-18A, EA-18G, who knows?
Can the EA-18 do everything a Prowler does? No, but it can do a lot of things the Prowler doesn't do now. The addition of hard kill weapons (JDAM, JASSM?) is being looked at and a new platform is really nice. Losing the 2 extra guys is not good, but they are not making a 4 seat jet anymore. I think it will be a slight loss in capability but not too bad with all the computerization. It definitely won't be as big a loss in capability as going from the F-4G Wild Weasel to the F-16CJ, that was a real big loss.
Finally, the Prowler is pretty hard to land at the boat. They apparently used to send guys with pretty good boat grades to VAQ if they were just OK in ACM, at least that is what the pilots told me. The two biggest reasons I think it is hard to land an EA-6B on the boat is it's size and the lack of gucci gear, like a HUD. I am an ECMO from one of the land based squadrons so a pilot (we don't have one as far as I know on the board) or EA6Bflyer could probably tell you a little more.
As for the name, there was a lot of grumbling in VAQ because of "scatological connotations" as it was delicately put by Navy Times. They had a panel of guys from the RAG to come up with suggestions for a new name, Mongoose was a popular one (associated with the Wild Weasel Hunter-killer role). And as for the designation, I have yet to see anything definitive, whether it is EA-18A, EA-18G, who knows?
Can the EA-18 do everything a Prowler does? No, but it can do a lot of things the Prowler doesn't do now. The addition of hard kill weapons (JDAM, JASSM?) is being looked at and a new platform is really nice. Losing the 2 extra guys is not good, but they are not making a 4 seat jet anymore. I think it will be a slight loss in capability but not too bad with all the computerization. It definitely won't be as big a loss in capability as going from the F-4G Wild Weasel to the F-16CJ, that was a real big loss.
Finally, the Prowler is pretty hard to land at the boat. They apparently used to send guys with pretty good boat grades to VAQ if they were just OK in ACM, at least that is what the pilots told me. The two biggest reasons I think it is hard to land an EA-6B on the boat is it's size and the lack of gucci gear, like a HUD. I am an ECMO from one of the land based squadrons so a pilot (we don't have one as far as I know on the board) or EA6Bflyer could probably tell you a little more.
They manage to land T-45's on the boat all the time w/o a HUD. A HUD, while very nice to have, is not essential for CV ops. In fact, the HUD in the -45A is essentially worthless for anything but Weaps. Night or day, it doesn't take a HUD - it only helps the Ball, AOA, Lineup scan.
- Status