Grumman S-2 Tracker and derivatives

[GTX_Admin]

1.) Engines* - obviously the Garrett/Honeywell TPE331 (T76) or Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A but are there any other possibilities?

Answered above.

2.) Surveillance packages* - what would be some useful data gathering & interpreting systems suitable for general coastal/maritime ELINT?

Maybe look at either the Singaporean Fokker F-50 Enforcer Mk.2 aircraft or RAAF AP-3C. Both have ELTA surveillance systems incorporating advanced ELINT equipment - look at the wingtips/bellies of both to see the sort of antenna etc you may wish to add on:




If doing a RAN platform, having similar systems to the AP-3Cs in particular will be useful.

3.) Patrol packages* - optical & electronic search systems suitable for general coastal/maritime detection & observation tasks?

Again, I would follow the AP-3C route and try to adopt as common suite as possible.  FYI, the AP-3C via Projects AIR 5140 and AIR 5276 added in the following systems:

• AN/ALR2001 ESM system;
• Elta EL/M-2022(V)3 radar - either this or a variant could be retrofitted into the S-2 instead of the original AN/APS-38 radar;
• Star Safire III electro-optical and infrared system - this could easily be added in, either in a retractable or non-retractable fitting;
• UYS 503 acoustic system - again, this or something akin to could be added in; and
• Other computer processors, comms suite and glass cockpit/navigation systems.

Another option might be to adopt the systems/sensors etc of the S-3B Viking (see here for useful walk around photos) or even ES-3A Shadow.  Given both the S-2 and the S-3 have 4 person crews and are of roughly similar size and role, one could easily see an argument for shoehorning the S-3 systems into a upgraded S-2T.

All of this will depend upon the timings of your proposed aircraft build.  If the early/mid '80s I might go with the S-3B stye fit out.  If a decade or so later, I might go for the AP-3C systems.

4.) Integrated systems - how would these packages be incorporated into the airframe with minimal alteration of the existing lay-out (remembering that this is not meant to be a weapons carrier).

If ou are happy to give up the weapons bay you could put a lot in there.  Either way, one should be able to add in most items with only external antenna (such as the examples shown above) visible on wingtips and fuselage

[GTX_Admin]

Of course, there's also this route:

[Old Wombat]

What time frame are you looking at? Modern or maybe 1980's?

I was thinking the 1980-to-2000 period, after the RAN FAA de-commissioned its Trackers in my time-line (as opposed to RW, when they were de-commissioned in 1984 & pretty much left to rot).

The Trackers will be used purely for the patrol/surveillance role & have no weapons or ASW-specific equipment fitted; think Customs, Immigration, Fisheries, Shipping Control & EPA as the primary functions, with some ability to carry out surveillance of foreign warships & military aircraft which come too close to Australian waters/airspace.

Thanks heaps, Greg!

I had a look at the Walter 601's but none of them had the power I was looking for.

The GE CT7/T700 & P&W 100's look pretty good - especially the P&W's, as I think I'll have to scratch build the engines & they appear to have simpler nacelles.

Saving the photo's to the appropriate folders, now.

[GTX_Admin]

What scale are you building in?

[Old Wombat]

The true One True Scale, Greg ... 1/48!

[GTX_Admin]

The true One True Scale, Greg ... 1/48!

Good man! 

[GTX_Admin]

I was thinking the 1980-to-2000 period, after the RAN FAA de-commissioned its Trackers in my time-line (as opposed to RW, when they were de-commissioned in 1984 & pretty much left to rot).

That makes sense.  Maybe have the story being that after the RAN retires them, the aircraft are acquired/provided to someone such as Surveillance Australia (more on this below) to form the Coastwatch style organisation a few years earlier than in the real world.

The Trackers will be used purely for the patrol/surveillance role & have no weapons or ASW-specific equipment fitted; think Customs, Immigration, Fisheries, Shipping Control & EPA as the primary functions, with some ability to carry out surveillance of foreign warships & military aircraft which come too close to Australian waters/airspace.

So, something akin to the real world Surveillance Australia/Coastwatch program.  In this case, you can so away with a lot of equipment and simplify things.  I would still give them a new radar and EO system, probably similar to that used by the Dash 8 aircraft - see here.  You could also use the Australian Customs IAI 124N Sea Scan aircraft as a point of inspiration.

[kitnut617]

So something like these Dash 8's that are used for Surveillance. They've got all sorts of lumps and bumps on them

[apophenia]

So something like these Dash 8's that are used for Surveillance. They've got all sorts of lumps and bumps on them

Yup. All those lumps and bumps on the Coastwatch and NASP Dash 8s are similar but, for anyone who cares about such things, the techno-blather varies.

The Coastwatch aircraft carry Raytheon SeaVue 1022 search radar and Wescam 16DS (later MX-15) E/O turrets. (The sensor input is synthesized with data from the Australian Maritime Identification System.) On the radar, the SeaVue XMC (eXpanded Mission Capability) was trialled but I'm not sure if it ever became standard ... anyone know?

The NASP DCH-8-100M has a Swedish MSS 6000 Maritime Surveillance System (EO/IR turret, 360° search radar, and 2 x SAAB SLAR antennae on the sides). NASP aircraft also carry an IR/UV line scanner to track oil slicks (although a belly window is the only hint). [/nerd mode]

[Old Wombat]

Thanks, kitnut!

I was thinking the 1980-to-2000 period, after the RAN FAA de-commissioned its Trackers in my time-line (as opposed to RW, when they were de-commissioned in 1984 & pretty much left to rot).

That makes sense.  Maybe have the story being that after the RAN retires them, the aircraft are acquired/provided to someone such as Surveillance Australia (more on this below) to form the Coastwatch style organisation a few years earlier than in the real world.

The Trackers will be used purely for the patrol/surveillance role & have no weapons or ASW-specific equipment fitted; think Customs, Immigration, Fisheries, Shipping Control & EPA as the primary functions, with some ability to carry out surveillance of foreign warships & military aircraft which come too close to Australian waters/airspace.

So, something akin to the real world Surveillance Australia/Coastwatch program.  In this case, you can so away with a lot of equipment and simplify things.  I would still give them a new radar and EO system, probably similar to that used by the Dash 8 aircraft - see here.  You could also use the Australian Customs IAI 124N Sea Scan aircraft as a point of inspiration.

In my time line (the same one for the RAM & the Grumman Grebe, et al.) the RAN Coast Guard is formed shortly post-WW1 with a few CMB's & some fast ex-pearling luggers as a counter to smuggling activities across the Top End. A lack of dedicated funds & some questionable activities saw it fold in the mid-30's. However, immediately post-WW2 a few Dog Boats (Fairmile D's) & a couple of corvettes (Bathurst's), plus a small number of Catalinas were allocated for training & small-scale operations to be the seed of a larger & more professional RAN CG covering both RAN & civilian agency patrol & surveillance requirements.

The Trackers are merely transferred directly to the Coast Guard, rather than sold (the CG operating on a mix of hand-me-downs & new, purpose built equipment).

The Dash-8's look like a good starting point for base-line surveillance systems with some ELTA lumps & bumps added for improved ELINT. Not sure how the SeaScan nose would work on a Tracker but maybe something similar added low & just aft of the cockpit on an extended forward fuselage might work.

The technical details may, of course, be a little bit ... um .. fudged to suit whiffability &, to some degree, the Rule of Cool.

Thanks for the ideas!

[Kerick]

This is very interesting to see develop. I hope you are able to create a great whif.
BTW the Taiwanese tracker looks like a whif already.

[kitnut617]

I've got a few of the Hobbycraft Dash 8's in the stash which will have various CCG schemes,

but this one (top pic) I decided to take further in the scheme of the bottom pic (notice it has different lumps and bumps)

[Old Wombat]

The more I look at it the more I'm liking the GE CT7/T700 as an engine option, as it has heaps of power, a history of reliability & leaves open the possibility of eventual replacement of the Trackers by a CN-235 variant.

[tankmodeler]

The more I look at it the more I'm liking the GE CT7/T700 as an engine option, as it has heaps of power, a history of reliability & leaves open the possibility of eventual replacement of the Trackers by a CN-235 variant.

No, no, no!

As a fellow member of the Commonwealth, you need to put Canadian-designed and -built PW-100s in your bird! And the PW150 has bags of power.


 

[GTX_Admin]

The more I look at it the more I'm liking the GE CT7/T700 as an engine option, as it has heaps of power, a history of reliability & leaves open the possibility of eventual replacement of the Trackers by a CN-235 variant.

In that case you could model your nacelles one one of the existing users of the type such as:

SAAB 340:


CN-235:


Let L-610:


Or even Sukhoi S-80:


Personally, I like the CN-235 or L-610 look which would look different on the Tracker though its up to you.

[kitnut617]

You could put the undercarriage in some side sponsons, that would look cool ---

[apophenia]

... the bottom pic (notice it has different lumps and bumps)

Very interesting kitnut'. AFAIK, the CCG Dash 8s didn't carry any surveillance suite in 2001 when that photo was taken.

Those fuselage-side bulges resemble Provincial Aerospace's photo ports ... except there's no window    So what the heck are they?

[Old Wombat]

@Greg: I was thinking of the CN-235 type as a base, as it looks easier to scratch-build & fit into the contours of the Tracker nacelle.

Prop's are going to be the issue, I can't seem to find anything suitable in Aus at the moment.

The US is out-of-bounds; I tried to order a pair of 1/48 resin wheels ... $7 for the parts, $50 for postage!

UK could be similarly ruinous & HLJ don't seem to have what I need either.

[Kerick]

Those postage rates are ridiculous! How is anyone supposed to do business?

[kitnut617]

I found that out myself when I was sending some spare bits to Fred in Ozz. It was parts for a 1/72 ball turret and the post office said C$35 please. I just said 'you're joking' and was told Australia is the most expensive country to mail things to.  But I managed to get it down to C$10 as a non-tracking airmail item but now it's tied up somewhere because of the postal workers strike action (even though they've had a back-to-work order) so don't know where it is at the moment.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

$50 for postage!

No kiss on the cheek or the courtesy of a reach-a-round for the schtooping you get from the post office. 

[GTX_Admin]

What sort of props are you after?

[Old Wombat]

Probably 4- or 5-bladers, I was looking for Herc/E-3 props but have recently wondered if Fury props would cut it.

[GTX_Admin]

Probably 4- or 5-bladers, I was looking for Herc/E-3 props but have recently wondered if Fury props would cut it.

If you are looking for something to give a modernised look, I would tend towards the 5 blade prop as well.  That said, if you look at the Taiwanese S-2Ts, they have 4 bladed props:



Though the Argentine ones have 5 bladed ones:



If we use the latter as a guide, they are 11ft (3.35m) diameter Hartzell ones one could look at a couple of options in the 1/48 scale:

Sea Fury:  Was Rotol 5 bladed of 12ft 9 inch (3.89m) diameter
Spitfire XIV:  Was Rotol 5 bladed of 10 ft 5 in (3.18 m) diameter  you can get copies from the likes of Quickboost with some available at BNA Model World her in Australia



Spitfire Mk. 21 - 24 and Seafire 46/47 (non-contra prop):  Was Rotol 5 bladed ofs 11 ft (3.35 m) diameter - you can get copies from the likes of Quickboost or Barracuda Studios.



Personally, I would go for the last option with the 11 ft props.  I think the Sea Fury ones will be too large.  There are some of all of these on EBay.  Not sure what prices you were getting with your other options but it may be worth a look.

BTW, not sure at what stage this is at:

[kitnut617]

However, both the Spitfire and Sea Fury props are the wrong hand, they turn in the opposite way