In my experience S.P.I .,,,the foam in the tanks was part of the
survivability mod done on the P-3's in the mid--late 80's. It was a
huge failure, it disintegrated and plugged up pumps, filters, etc. It
was a sure maintenance nightmare whenever we had to do any fuel cell
repair, or the daily fuel samples showed pieces of foam floating
around in it. The foam was actually in big removable numbered pieces
that fit together like a jigsaw puzzle for each tank, and had to be
removed and stored in a big portable storage tank. It has been removed
fleet-wide by an AFC in the mid 90's because of these reasons.
OBTW, talking about backfitting survivability, the "Matador"
Infrared jammers were the biggest joke I've seen for the P-3's. Around
the same timeframe (mid-late 80's to the mid 90's), whichever squadron
would deploy to SWA, would be issued about 4 of these systems, along
with chaff/flare pods that were wing rack mounted. We could never get
them to work, tried like hell, found many discrepancies, ordered many
parts. Eventually, we would just deploy with 4 tri-walls (about 10,000
lbs. of junk), airlift it to Misawa or Diego, then just let it sit
there in the tri-walls for 6 months then haul it home! You can tell
which P-3's went through this mod by the welded brackets that were
used to mount the Matadors Transmitter, (about 100 lbs each), just aft
of the main cabin door, and on the opposite side of the fuselage.
The current ALQ-157/ALE-47 system (chaff and flare pods are
mounted in the #2 and #3 beavertails, receiver/transmitters are
mounted on the forward and aft radomes) ) being used now are a huge
increase in capability and reliability.

On 26 Dec 2003 23:46:39 -0800, (s.p.i.)
wrote:

"dano" wrote in message ...
Predicting the future...Who'd a thought this little nugget sensor operator
would have gone from chasing Soviet subs in the North Atlantic to flying ISR
mission over Afghanistan - in less than 20 years
At least what has been put out publicly, due to survivabilty
considerations, the MMA won't be doing overland ISR.
I am heartened a little by the recent DHL incident - I always thought that a
MANPAD was 100% fatal.

It was a miracle that the DHL wasn't fatal. They had no hydraulics,
and the after spar was only moments away from failure. If they had
taken a good gust load the outcome would have been much worse. Like I
said before, those guys need never play the Lotto because they used up
every bit of luck they may ever have.
Of note, the second VP-26 loss sounds like it was a spar failure
caused by fire too. Hydrodynamic ram induced fire I'd bet. Better
protection from hydrodynamic ram fires should be a priority for large
aircraft both military and civil...And of course its a bad idea to
expect large aircraft-especially large aircraft designed for civil
use-to survive over hot battlefields, your OEF experience
notwithstanding.
How much of a maintenance headache has the fuel tank foam been Dano?
Backfitting survivability is always problematic and expensive.

MANPADS are not the only threat. There is this capability coming on
the export market:

"Russian guided-weapons builder Novator is continuing to work, albeit
slowly, on an ultralong-range air-to-air missile, with a version on
offer for export to a select customer set.

Designated article 172, the weapon was included on a model of the
Su-35 derivative of the Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker, on display during the
Dubai air show. The export version, known as the 172S1, has a 300-km.
(186-mi.) range, compared with 400 km. for the original version
specified by the Russian air force. The missile, which is also
referred to (perhaps erroneously) as the KS-172, is intended to engage
specific high-value targets such as airborne warning and control
aircraft, air-to-ground surveillance and tanker platforms."