Boeing Reveals Sub-Tracking ScanEagle Study

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...hannel=defense

I suppose that will allow the P-8A to use MAD while staying
at high altitude. But is the small, disposable MAD gear a
Scan Eagle would carry as good as the tail stinger on a larger
aircraft?

wrote in
:

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...AN060908.xml&h
eadline=Boeing%20Reveals%20Sub-Tracking%20ScanEagle%20Study&channel=defen
se

I suppose that will allow the P-8A to use MAD while staying
at high altitude. But is the small, disposable MAD gear a
Scan Eagle would carry as good as the tail stinger on a larger
aircraft?


Probably. The external magnetic influences would certainly be much smaller.
In addition, using 21st century technology, instead of '70s or '80s, would
likely make a smaller, more efficient package.

Dave in Sandy Eggo
AT1, USN (Ret)

On Jun 11, 12:16*am, Dave wrote:
wrote :

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...s/SCAN060908.x....
eadline=Boeing%20Reveals%20Sub-Tracking%20ScanEagle%20Study&channel=defen
se

I suppose that will allow the P-8A to use MAD while staying
at high altitude. *But is the small, disposable MAD gear a
Scan Eagle would carry as good as the tail stinger on a larger
aircraft?

Probably. The external magnetic influences would certainly be much smaller..
In addition, using 21st century technology, instead of '70s or '80s, would
likely make a smaller, more efficient package.

Dave in Sandy Eggo
AT1, USN (Ret)

More on UAV's that might someday be launched from the P-8A:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...3-d22a245e68c9

BTW, the article in the original post says the ScanEagle
is supposed to follow a submarine around for up to 24 hrs.
Is that possible with just a MAD?

I thought MAD was usually used to confirm sonar contacts,
and pin down the Sub's locations for a more accurate
torpedo drop.

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:02:17 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

sinpped for brevity

BTW, the article in the original post says the ScanEagle
is supposed to follow a submarine around for up to 24 hrs.
Is that possible with just a MAD?

In theory, yes. In practice, why would you want to? The idea of the
MAD system was two fold: first, you up the probability of a sub
contact (although that's not a "for sure"; the wreck of the "Andrea
Doria" was once tracked for two days :-) ); second, you develop VERY
accurate position data for weapons release. If all you want do do is
confirm a contact then a couple of passes will do.

It's possible that you might want to engage in a "hold down" action to
prevent the sub from doing something else. But in that case you WANT
the sub to know you're there and tracking it. So stealth would not be
desired.

I thought MAD was usually used to confirm sonar contacts,
and pin down the Sub's locations for a more accurate
torpedo drop.

Generally, yes.

It looks like the P-8 is going to use expendable UAV's to look
at surface targets too:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...5-6ca2d4b9d24d

Using expendable UAV's for routine missions like this could get
expensive after awhile.

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:09:22 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

It looks like the P-8 is going to use expendable UAV's to look
at surface targets too:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...5-6ca2d4b9d24d

Using expendable UAV's for routine missions like this could get
expensive after awhile.

For routine missions you wouldn't.

wrote:

:It looks like the P-8 is going to use expendable UAV's to look
:at surface targets too:
:
:http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...5-6ca2d4b9d24d
:
:Using expendable UAV's for routine missions like this could get
:expensive after awhile.
:

Apparently that costs less than the loss of airframe life from using
the airplane to do it, which is why it's being considered.

--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney