P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

User avatar
wild_Willie2
Posts: 2934
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by wild_Willie2 »

The P-8's will also be used for counterinsurgency surveillance purposes (Somalia, Afghanistan (insert other hellhole)) and drug interdiction besides ASW...
In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.
User avatar
Malakie
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 3:47 am

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Malakie »

As a former Sonar Technician, United States Navy, I think the decision to forgo MAD gear is one of the biggest mistakes the Navy has made.

Reasons:

1) Today, sub threats are even more serious than during the cold war. In fact they are LOT more quiet especially diesel subs (for those not knowing this, diesel subs are much harder to find than nuke boats)

2) Sonobouys cannot pick up trolling subs unless a mistake by the sub is made, some kind of equipment malfunction on the sub OR lucky close aboard sound short and distance. While they are ok for picking up normal peacetime movement and sounds of submerged contacts, during war time when subs go quiet, they are no where near as able to detect them.

3) Even if sonobouys do detect and a contact is successfully prosecuted, it is not possible to verify exact position unless active sonar is used or unless you get extremely lucky and 3 or more bouys can hear the contact passive. Active bouys are not even close to as powerful as shipboard or sub based active arrays.

4) This means MAD was extremely useful in pinpointing a contact., ESPECIALLY for an aircraft or helo. Not to mention, let's say you have a contact but the damn thing is so quiet, fading in and out, that you cannot get a blade count nor harmonics from machinery... sending out the helo and using the MAD on the contact can confirm right now if you are chasing a biologic or an actual man made object.

But of course some cubicle sitting desk jockey (probably Air force) decided it was not needed on an aeroplane...and thus the change...

Take it light...

Malakie
User avatar
stilesw
Posts: 1569
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 10:08 pm
Location: Hansville, WA, USA

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by stilesw »

While I don't want to start some prolonged inter disciplinary harangue I would like to comment that after a career in the Air Force I cannot and no not claim to be an expert on Naval operations, requirements or tactics. As a service we certainly have our share of dunderheads who have difficulty finding their way out of their cubicles let alone make good decisions. However, after serving in joint service billets I can personally speak to the fact that all of our armed services also have similar "pointy haired" boss types. I would believe (and hope) that such a decision re MAD requirements would have been made by the Navy, or at least jointly, and not be within the pervue of the USAF.

W. Stiles, Retired ZUMI
“There is no limit to what a man can do so long as he does not care a straw who gets the credit for it.”

Charles Edward Montague, English novelist and essayist
~Disenchantment, ch. 15 (1922)
User avatar
Dysta
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:32 pm

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Dysta »

Whatever it is, extra sensors isn't just about performance under superiority bias, but also an option to let crews to choose what sensors should be used in different situations.
Pergite!
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:40 pm
Location: The temperate climate zone

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Pergite! »

Did everyone miss that the MAD will be carried by air launched drones? The sensor and capability is still there. Putting the MAD in a drone will ensure the the use of all the other sensors on the airframe that depends on staying on higher altitudes.
User avatar
Dysta
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:32 pm

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Dysta »

MAD drone is mentioned before at previous page.
AlmightyTallest
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:00 pm

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by AlmightyTallest »

There's mention of the U.S. P-8 having hydrocarbon detectors to detect ships and diesel submarines.

http://www.jeffhead.com/usn21/p8.htm
The P-8A will use a new hydrocarbon sensor to detect fuel vapors from diesel submarines and other conventionally powered ships.

Saw some rumors of a "neutron trail detector" to find nuclear submarines as well.


As well as having other radars fitted: http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/exclusive-p-8-poseidon-flies-with-shadowy-radar-system-1562912667


Since diesel subs have to snorkel occasionally, it seems plausible these radar and sniffer systems are made to more quickly detect periscopes and snorkels and locate emissions over a vast search area.

Pergite!
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:40 pm
Location: The temperate climate zone

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Pergite! »

ORIGINAL: Dysta

MAD drone is mentioned before at previous page.

Yeah, I know. I posted it.
The discussion just seemed to imply that the P-8 wouldn't have MAD capability, which most likely does not reflect reality.

Interesting with the different sniffer sensors though. Maybe a need for new feature for Command in the future.
User avatar
Dutchie999
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 2:46 pm

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Dutchie999 »


Does anyone know if it is still possible to pick up a submarine with MAD after Deperming and Degaussing treatment?
User avatar
Dysta
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 9:32 pm

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by Dysta »

ORIGINAL: Dutchie999


Does anyone know if it is still possible to pick up a submarine with MAD after Deperming and Degaussing treatment?

As far as I know, a motor-powered ship is impossible to be entirely remove the gauss. Degaussed hull works for avoiding magnet-triggered nautical mines, while the propeller axis is magnetic, it got power to push sea mine out of its way. So it used for surface ships instead.

Motor-powered conventional submarine have battery and motor that create gauss when operating, so yes, MAD can pick it up.
magi
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:06 am

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by magi »

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-8_Poseidon

This from wiki answers most of the general questions here…
If they are going to have an air launched mad module… I hope it will be recoverable…
AlmightyTallest
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:00 pm

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by AlmightyTallest »

Sort of conflicting, but the latest news from Janes here: http://www.janes.com/article/45418/p-8-reliability-offers-boost-to-usn-s-asw-mission-without-mad

In July 2014 Patrol Squadron (VP)-16 concluded the Poseidon's first operational deployment when its eight aircraft returned from Kadena Air Base in Japan after finishing 600 sorties and 3,500 flight hours.

Rear Adm Jaynes said that deployment confirmed the USN's decision not to add a magnetic anomaly detector (MAD) to the P-8 in later increments. MAD is "pretty much off the table", she said. "Having the VP-16 deployment under our belt, we asked the skipper if there was a point when he wished he had a MAD boom, and he said throughout the whole deployment that he never heard anyone say, 'If I only had a MAD.'"

The rear admiral noted that the P-8's advanced sensors eliminate the need for a MAD. "The reason the MAD was on the [Lockheed] P-3 [Orion], I think, has been overcome by sensors that are on the P-8," she said. The P-8's sensor suite "provides better situational awareness".

The P-8's addition to the USN's ASW arsenal is "really not changing" the navy's operational concepts, said Rear Adm Jaynes. However, because "its sensors are so much more sensitive, you can find your target a lot faster". The navy is, therefore, fielding five aircraft per squadron instead of the nine P-3s per squadron previou



Some interesting info on the P-8's new sonobuoy systems: http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20150414-p8-acoustic.html
NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — The acoustic sensor system of the Navy’s P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft proving to be twice as effective as that of the older P-3C Orion.

Capt. Scott Dillon, the Navy’s program manager for maritime patrol and reconnaissance aircraft, speaking to reporters April 14 at the Navy League’s 2015 Sea-Air-Space Exposition, said, “Acoustics is the area where the aircraft has been shining,” while noting that that he has been “getting extremely favorable reviews of the aircraft’s real-world performance.”

The Boeing-built P-8 is likely to deliver even better acoustic detection and tracking capability with the introduction of Increment 2 upgrades, which include the Multistatic Active Coherent Capability (MAC).

MAC, an evolution of Improved Extended Echo Ranging used on the SSQ-110 sonobuoy, uses the SSQ-125 sonobuoy. The SSQ-125 generates loud sounds electronically rather than using small explosive charges to generate sound as in the SSQ-110. The long-range echoes from a target are intercepted by the sonobuoy and relayed to the aircraft’s sensor system. Dillon said the electronic sound sources generate fewer false returns than the explosive charges.

The MAC capability became operational on the P-3 last year. It has passed its operational evaluation, although the full report has not yet been signed out. The next P-8 squadron to deploy, scheduled for September, will incorporate this capability as the Navy has begun retrofits of MAC into the already delivered P-8s.

MAC is one of three major improvements being implemented in the Increment 2 upgrade. The others are the Automatic Information System and the High-Altitude ASW Weapon (HAAWC) system. HAAWC is a Mk54 torpedo with a Boeing-built wing kit, a Global Positioning System (GPS) and a data link with the aircraft. The weapon can glide from high altitudes — allowing the aircraft to maintain a wide search area and increased standoff ranges from threats — and deliver the torpedo to a water entry point. In conjunction with HAAWC capability, the sonobuoys will have a GPS capability to enable the aircraft to maintain a precise plot of the sonobuoy field at high altitude, 10,000 feet or higher.

Dillon said the acoustic tracking capability of the P-8 is so precise that the decision to delete the magnetic anomaly detector, used by the P-3 at low altitude, from the P-8 design has been validated.
magi
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:06 am

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by magi »

Very interesting....
User avatar
SeaQueen
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:20 am
Location: Washington D.C.

RE: P-8 Poseidon submarine hunting

Post by SeaQueen »

EER/IEER/ADAR isn't really new. They've employed it on the P-3 for years. MAC is the replacement system for it, because EER and IEER can only "ping" as many times as they have explosive charges attached. MAC, being electronic can ping for as long as it's batteries last.

For some reason these multistatic systems are less famous than the DIFAR/DICASS/VLAD buoys, though. I guess because they didn't appear in The Hunt for Red October or Red Storm Rising, and they're multistatic (hence complicated) that they don't really hold the same prominence in people's minds.
Some interesting info on the P-8's new sonobuoy systems: http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories ... ustic.html
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”