Skip to content

P-8 Poseidon — U.S. Navy’s newest submarine adversary

19 March 2014

P-8 Poseidon — U.S. Navy’s newest submarine adversary

P-8A — U.S. Navy photo by Personnel Spec 1st Class Anthony Petry

Boeing P-8A Poseidon — U.S. Navy photo by Personnel Spec 1st Class Anthony Petry

The U.S. Navy is currently replacing the Lockheed P-3 Orion with the Boeing P-8 Poseidon as its premier antisubmarine warfare (ASW) aircraft. Capable of carrying a myriad of weapons (torpedoes, depth charges as well a variety of missiles) not to mention sonabuoys the P-8 is obviously a sinister derivative of the Boeing B-737 airliner.

P-8A — U.S. Navy photo by Personnel Spec 1st Class Anthony Petry

P-8A Poseidon view of ventral antennae fairings — U.S. Navy photo by Personnel Spec 1st Class Anthony Petry

The Poseidon’s bomb bay is located just aft of the wing and it is also equipped with Raytheon APY-10 high resolution radar (a mid-ventral pod also houses a radar which is lowered when in use) which can operate both overland as over the water (exemplifying the Navy’s new emphasis regarding littoral combat arenas).

P-8A rep Mk-54 torpedo U.S. Navy photo by Greg L Davis

P-8A test dropping an inert replica Mk-54 torpedo — U.S. Navy photo by Greg L. Davis

The Poseidon has a longer fuselage which has been strengthened, especially to carry the extra fuel carried in cargo bay cells fore and aft (with the capability for in-flight refueling). The distinctive raked wingtips are those used on the B-767 as opposed to the B-737. Along the port side in the main cabin are five operator stations. The Poseidon lacks for windows as they are only present for the cockpit with just a single pair in the forward portion of the main cabin, one for the right and one for the left sides.

6 Comments leave one →
  1. 19 March 2014 07:41

    I flew ASW missions as a crewmember on the Lockheed P2V-7 Neptune way back when. Then the Neptune was replaced with the P-3. What I don’t see on the new P-8 is a MAD boom. Of course technology has changed over the decades so I’m sure there is a black box to replace it.

    • travelforaircraft permalink*
      20 March 2014 00:27

      Yes, the lack of a MAD boom “stinger” is noted. I tried to find why it was not required but have not yet had the luck to find the answer.

      • Brian K. Beckwith permalink
        1 February 2015 13:49

        MAD gear was eliminated because it would adversely effect the range/on-station-loiter requirements. I don’t know if they have come up with something else to replace it. The only real thing I am sure of, this aircraft has some very sophisticated capabilities. So much so that no one other than authorized crew are allowed in side it. There are several bumps and bulges on the fuselage that defy explanation.

  2. shortfinals permalink
    19 March 2014 12:39

    I really envy the USN their P-8. The short-sighted British Government put a bulldozer through their Nimrod fleet (literally!), just after they sold off all the Harriers to the USMC for spares!

    • travelforaircraft permalink*
      20 March 2014 00:25

      Yes, sad indeed 😦 I’d love to see a Nimrod one day–it has a unique look.

  3. David DeBace permalink
    21 March 2014 08:56

    Nice article. There are problems they need to fix. Like dropping sonabuoys from higher altitudes that work after they hit the water and so on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: