737 MMA

Pechs1 wrote:
Mike- No. From further engagements with PLAAF F-8s. BRBR

yep, I'll take a P-3 weenie in a fight with the chinese 'fighter pilots'
anyday.

When the balloon goes up with China, it's going to be another "Marianna's
'spicey turkey with almonds' shoot"-

Kung Pao Turkey?

"nafod40" wrote...

When the balloon goes up with China, it's going to be another "Marianna's
'spicey turkey with almonds' shoot"-

Kung Pao Turkey?

....with bamboo shoots.

(Pechs1) wrote in message ...
also- Als, there is a whole new generation of
threats specifically targing the aircraft that have historically
remained on the perepheries of the battlespace. BRBR

AWACS and MPA are not the same thing. An AWACS loitering at 30,000 feet and a
MPA wandering around in the weeds are not the same.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

By all accounts the MMA won't be spending nearly the same amount of
time down in the weeds. I will opine this 737 variant will spend very
littel time below FL210.
Indeed Mr. Alger had this to say about his P-3 experience:
"Most of the sonobouys we jettisoned during my P-3 days (all reserve
time: VP-94) were sent out at altitudes above 10,000' - and a majority
of those above 20K. We spent very little of our time below 10K...."

The MPA days characterized by bear hunts in blue water are done. The
MMA will be spending its time in conditions more like those of Market
Time-and thats where the P-3 suffered its only combat losses. Also,
the MMA will utilized much more in a C4I role and as such will be more
like E-3s instead of P-3s...

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/sea...2F06214wna.xml

"However, supporters contend that the Navy's need is for larger,
sophisticated aircraft with the room to increase the crew size,
payload and power. They could then serve as airborne nodes to analyze
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance data direct from the
battlefield without the time-consuming and communications-clogging
option of sending it to facilities in the U.S."

He is pulling your leg too! No MMAs exist at the moment, although Boeing
made the circuit of VP bases with a 737 during the competition.

The first MMA won't even get to Pax for testing until 2008 or 9 and "the
whole package" hasn't even been firmed up or any metal cut yet.

Makes a great happy hour story though!

Tom
VX-20 Flight Test at Pax

"Elmshoot" wrote in message
...
I was talking to a guy at work who is in the reservr P-3 community and has
experience FLYING the MMA he said it is not suitable at low altitude the
whole
package is not to standards and is wondering how combat damage resistamt
it
will be made.
Sparky
Question for the naval aviators: How is the new 737 MMA going to perform
as
the
P-3s replacement? I know it's bigger, carries more "stuff" and whatnot,
but
from what I know of jet engines (even high-bypass fans), won't it be very
fuel
INefficient in the same regime as the P-3 prowls? Cruising along at
1000' or
so
and around 200 KIAS? Or is the MMA going to be punching out sonobuoys
from a
much higher altitude and at a much higher speed?

Is this aircraft the real answer or is it more taxpayer money into the
gaping
maw of the military-industrial copmplex?

He is pulling your leg too! No MMAs exist at the moment, although Boeing
made the circuit of VP bases with a 737 during the competition.

Tom,
I wasn't trying to pull anyones leg. Most readers on this NG know enough to
understand certain assumtions are made. In this case I thought everyone
understood that the plane flown was the proposed MMA a 737. Purported to be
like or similar to the the final product. At this point my buddy who has a butt
load of P-3 time found the planes low altitude handeling unacceptable. I am
taking his comments as sincere and at face value.

Sparky

Sparky

----- Original Message -----
From: "Elmshoot"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military.naval
To:
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:12 PM
Subject: 737 MMA


He is pulling your leg too! No MMAs exist at the moment, although Boeing
made the circuit of VP bases with a 737 during the competition.

Tom,
I wasn't trying to pull anyones leg. Most readers on this NG know enough
to
understand certain assumtions are made. In this case I thought everyone
understood that the plane flown was the proposed MMA a 737. Purported to
be
like or similar to the the final product. At this point my buddy who has a
butt
load of P-3 time found the planes low altitude handeling unacceptable. I
am
taking his comments as sincere and at face value.

Sparky

Sparky
-------------------tom sez----------------
Understood!

I wonder what his specific handling quality issues were?

The P-3 is no prince in some regards, for instance it has fairly high
control forces and rides like a Humvee, compared to some other large
aircraft such as the Herk. Of
course it wasn't designed to be a comfortable passenger aircraft (in spite
of it's lineage), but a fairly responsive tactical aircraft. I have over
5ooo hours in it and still think it is a lot of fun to fly! Of course I
like the Herk, 707 and CV-880 too, but each has it's foibles. You haven't
had fun until you excite a dutch roll in an 880 or a 707!

I think another issue is that the mission of VP is changing, so taking the
whole mission into account and new sensors, there probably will not be much
low level (200-300) ASW as in the past. I suspect flying the MMA around a
4000 yard mad trapping circle at 200 feet might be a bit nerve wracking!

Tom

Saw a piece on the 'tube' abot China's new sub fleet. Maybe put some sting in
the need for new antisub fare to protect the CV, when the balloon goes up over
Tiawan.

A conflict around the Tiawanese straights is not going to be pretty.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer