New Japanese MPA

[Tasman]

However, the rate of climb is higher for > than 2 engines on any given airplane; hence this new MPA is going to attain optimal cruise altitude sooner than P-8, and it follows that it will arrive to its patrol area before P-8 does. I bet that P-8 can't fly as high as XP-1. The higher the ceiling of jet powered MPA, greater the speed!

The thrust from the two engines on the P-8A is 54,000 lb and max TO weight is 85,000 kg. The total thrust from the four engines on the MPA is 44,800 lb and max TO weight is 80,000 lb. Given these figures I can't see how you can be certain that the MPA will climb faster and arrive in its patrol area sooner.

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/p8a/docs/P-8A_overview.pdf

IMO, we need to wait for the performance specifications of both aircraft to be made available before we can realistically compare them.

Tas

 

[Firehorse]

data

For P-8:

Speed Max Cruise Speed: 490 KTAS (True Air Speed) (564 mph, 789 kmh)
Ceiling 41,000 ft
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/p-8-specs.htm

Kawasaki P-1:

Maximum speed: 830 km/h (500 knots, 516 mph) http://www.sfu.ca/casr/bg-cp140-replacement-px.htm

I couldn't find max ceiling for it, but it is well known that at higher altitudes it's easier to gain higher speed. The data above do show higher speed for
P-8, but it is yet to fly. The jury is still out...

 

[gf0012-aust]

I couldn't find max ceiling for it, but it is well known that at higher altitudes it's easier to gain higher speed. The data above do show higher speed for P-8, but it is yet to fly. The jury is still out...

speed is not the determinant. time on station is and then depending on tasking, warload.

consider the fact that bulk of change is coming from companion tasking.

eg, unarmed BAMS for continuous loiter, and manned for back up and prosection.

the model changes if you go to armed BAMS as it adds prosecution autonomy into the tasking model.

optimum cruise altitude needs to bear a relationship to nominal loitering altitude otherwise there is a disconnect.

 

[buglerbilly]

For P-8:


Kawasaki P-1:

I couldn't find max ceiling for it, but it is well known that at higher altitudes it's easier to gain higher speed. The data above do show higher speed for
P-8, but it is yet to fly. The jury is still out...

The jury is still out? On what pray tell............

The P-8 is a 737 derivative, I wouldn't have thought there was much to find out about its operational capabilities or endurance at ANY height. The weight it is carrying also means it is lightly loaded.

 

[swerve]

I look at the Japanese MPA in its taxi and flight rials and the one thing that stands out for me is that it is tiny, or at least appears to be so?...

Regards,

BUG

I think it looks small because of the four engined configuration. It is very similar in size & weight to the P-8, i.e. larger & heavier than a P-3C, smaller & lighter than a Nimrod MRA4 - but 90% of the weight of a Nimrod MR2. It's very slightly bigger than an A320, of which an MPA derivative is being marketed.

Kawasaki XP-1
Span 38.0
Length 35.0
4 x 50 kN turbofans - total 200 kN
MTOW 80000 kg

P-8A Poseidon
Span 39.5
Length 35.7
2 x 120 kN turbofans - total 240 kN
MTOW 85000 kg

 

[buglerbilly]

I think it looks small because of the four engined configuration. It is very similar in size & weight to the P-8, i.e. larger & heavier than a P-3C, smaller & lighter than a Nimrod MRA4 - but 90% of the weight of a Nimrod MR2. It's very slightly bigger than an A320, of which an MPA derivative is being marketed.

Kawasaki XP-1
Span 38.0
Length 35.0
4 x 50 kN turbofans - total 200 kN
MTOW 80000 kg

P-8A Poseidon
Span 39.5
Length 35.7
2 x 120 kN turbofans - total 240 kN
MTOW 85000 kg

Hmmm that is surprising..........thanks for the info..............

I still think its small, just the rest of them are also small altho' I'd be curious to compare internal volumes, but just curious..........probably no major differences.

Regards,

BUG

 

[Firehorse]

size

I've got the same impression- it looks small, but it isn't. With electronic gear Japanese can fit in, there's no need for a lot of volume. And if need be, the fuselage can be stretched on follow-on models by a few feet to provide extra room.

gf0012-aust, what is BAMS? Broad Area Maritime Survailance?

 

[RubiconNZ]

gf0012-aust, what is BAMS? Broad Area Maritime Survailance?

I'm not GF, but yes.

 

[scorpion1940]

beatiful plane thanks for post