Pakistan's P-3C vs. India's P-8I :: India, Pakistan and the Naval Balance

[Cornered Tiger]

Attached 72 ASW also coming to PN

can u please elaborate?

 

[Penguin]

is that a pakistani p-3 ??

No. You see the US logo on the underside of the starboard wing, between the engines.

What is the loiter or station time for P8?

Depends on how far you fly out first.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

No. You see the US logo on the underside of the starboard wing, between the engines.


Depends on how far you fly out first.

Point was for P8 flag wavers. p3 and other turboprop MPAs and LRMP aircraft are unmatched in their flight and loiter time, their primary task of being on station guarding a sector.

 

[Penguin]

Not true, or maybe i am being naive. The main advantage of P-8s are it's range. Talking from Pakistani perspective, they have smaller coastline to defend, and P-3 Orions can be upgraded with more or less similar sensor suites like P-8s.

P-3C

• Range: 2,380 nmi radius (4,400 km)
• Combat radius: 1,346 nmi (2,490 km) three hours on-station at 1,500 feet
• Ferry range: 4,830 nmi (8,944 km)
• Endurance: 16 hours

P-8A

• Combat radius: 1,200 nmi (2,222 km) ; 4 hours on station (for anti-submarine warfare mission)
• Ferry range: 4,500 nautical miles (8,300 km)

AFAIK, ferry range of P-3C exceeds that of P-8A by 'just' 300nmi, while combat radius of both aircraft is very close: P-8A has 146 nmi less distance but 1 hour more on-station, so that evens it out a bit.

P-8 endurance requirement is 10,5 hours, but it can use the boom of tanker aircraft such as the KC-30A to refuel mid-air and push endurance to 20 hours.
http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/...n-adventure-flying-and-fighting-the-poseidon/
https://www.airforce.gov.au/Boeing-P8-A-Poseidon/?RAAF-Z4PUOpGXH/eLtWmc6qxYl9xYycb+rKng

India currently does not currently have boom-equipped tankers, just the IL-78 Midas with hose-and-drogue system, but this situation will change if and when India orders and takes delivery of the Airbus A330 MRTT aircraft.

The P-8 has a faster point-point speed, therefore can get to/from patrol areas faster.

 

[wiseone2]

P-3C

• Range: 2,380 nmi radius (4,400 km)
• Combat radius: 1,346 nmi (2,490 km) three hours on-station at 1,500 feet
• Ferry range: 4,830 nmi (8,944 km)
• Endurance: 16 hours

P-8A

• Combat radius: 1,200 nmi (2,222 km) ; 4 hours on station (for anti-submarine warfare mission)
• Ferry range: 4,500 nautical miles (8,300 km)

AFAIK, ferry range of P-3C exceeds that of P-8A by 'just' 300nmi, while combat radius of both aircraft is very close: P-8A has 146 nmi less distance but 1 hour more on-station, so that evens it out a bit.

P-8 endurance requirement is 10,5 hours, but it can use the boom of tanker aircraft such as the KC-30A to refuel mid-air and push endurance to 20 hours.
http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/...n-adventure-flying-and-fighting-the-poseidon/
https://www.airforce.gov.au/Boeing-P8-A-Poseidon/?RAAF-Z4PUOpGXH/eLtWmc6qxYl9xYycb+rKng

India currently does not currently have boom-equipped tankers, just the IL-78 Midas with hose-and-drogue system, but this situation will change if and when India orders and takes delivery of the Airbus A330 MRTT aircraft.

The P-8 has a faster point-point speed, therefore can get to/from patrol areas faster.

based on the specs i never understood the rationale to replace p-3 with p-8

 

[Penguin]

P-8A

• Combat radius: 1,200 nmi (2,222 km) ; 4 hours on station (for anti-submarine warfare mission)

An internal fuel capacity of almost 34 tonnes, gives the P-8A an unrefuelled range of over 4000 nautical miles (7,500 km) or the ability to remain on station conducting low level Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW) missions for over four hours at a range of more than 1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km) from base.
https://www.airforce.gov.au/Boeing-P8-A-Poseidon/?RAAF-Z4PUOpGXH/eLtWmc6qxYl9xYycb+rKng

By comparison

BAE Nimrod:

MR2 Range: 8,340–9,265 km (5,180–5,755 mi) 4x RR Spey turbofan
MRA4 Range: 11,119 km (6,910 mi) 4x RR BR710 turbofan

Inflight, the Nimrods had a flight endurance of ten hours without aerial refuelling; the MR2s were later fitted to receive mid-air refuelling in response to demands in the Falklands War

The Nimrod MR2 carried out three main roles – Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), Anti-Surface Unit Warfare (ASUW) and Search and Rescue (SAR). Its extended range enabled the crew to monitor maritime areas far to the north of Iceland and up to 4,000 km out into the Western Atlantic. With Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR), range and endurance was greatly extended.

Breguet Atlantic

Ferry range: 9,075 km (4,900 nmi, 5,635 mi)
Endurance: 18 hours

Kawasaki P-1

Range: 8,000 km (4,320 nm, 4,970 mi)

Japanese officials have claimed that the P-1 is a more capable, albeit more expensive, aircraft than the P-8. In comparison to the P-8, the P-1 has a greater range, a larger bomb bay, and has been purpose-built for the maritime patrol mission

IL-38

• Ferry range: 7,500 km (4,660 mi; 4,050 nmi)
• Endurance: 13 hours

Of course, derived as it is from T-95 Bear strategic bomber, the Tu-142 MPA beats all (but so would a Harpoon laden B-52 in naval strike role):

Combat radius: 6,500 km (3,454 nmi, 3,977 mi)

The operating range of 3,977mi (6400 km) and the maximum range is 7,953.55mi (12800 km).

B-52

• Combat radius: 4,480 mi (3,890 nmi, 7,210 km)
• Ferry range: 10,145 mi (8,764 nmi, 16,232 km)

Avro Shackleton

• Range: 1,950 nmi (2,250 mi, 3,620 km)
• Endurance: 14.6 hours

Lockheed P-2 Neptune

Operational Range: 1,912 nmi (2,157 mi) (3,540 km) or 3,458 nmi (3,903 mi) (6,406 km) with bomb bay tanks installed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_maritime_patrol_aircraft

 

[Super Falcon]

can u please elaborate?

In Wikipedia I saw Pak navy sent it's ATR 72 to Germany to instalASW suits