Beyond The Sprues
Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Aero-space => Topic started by: Rickshaw on February 22, 2014, 02:48:15 PM
-
New P-8 Poseidon surveillance aircraft for RAAF (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-21/p-8-surveillance-aircraft-to-boost-border-protection/5274976).
-
Doesn't the RAAF have the Wedgetail too, makes sense to keep a common airframe --
-
Sweet!
So when's the RCAF getting some?
-
Sweet!
So when's the RCAF getting some?
Only in our dreams.
UPDATED | $35M military plane upgrades highlight Canada's procurement delays
(http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/35m-military-plane-upgrades-highlight-canada-s-procurement-delays-1.2539886)
-
Doesn't the RAAF have the Wedgetail too, makes sense to keep a common airframe --
Yep. And 737 BBJ.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/RAAF_BBJ_3.jpg)
Will be interesting to see if the airframe/engine maintenance for all three is combined in one deal.
-
Yes but they are looking for a replacement for the BBJ now, something larger I believe. Common sense for the RAAF would be an A330 but I wouldn't be surprised if its a 787 with extra bicycle storage ;)
-
Yes but they are looking for a replacement for the BBJ now, something larger I believe. Common sense for the RAAF would be an A330 but I wouldn't be surprised if its a 787 with extra bicycle storage ;)
Perhaps they can use them instead of the batteries which keep overheating? ;)
-
The intel I have heard is that there are two A330s lined up already - so, instead of Kevin747 we can have AirbusAnthony...
-
But moving back on track, how about a RAF P-8?
-
And perhaps a RAF EP-8 as a more modern Rivet Joint airframe? Especially appropriate since the mod center (L3 Communications Integrated Systems Division of Greenville and Waco, TX) that does Rivet Joint aircraft also deals with EP-3's and has converted BBJ's and other airframes (the private 777 for a Saudi prince was really a piece of work).
-
Always thought the 757 would have been a good platform for various special adaptions. I know Boeing proposed a 757 ASW version that lost out to the P-7 but could also have seen it in AEW, ELINT, VIP and even tanker transport versions.
-
Always thought the 757 would have been a good platform for various special adaptions. I know Boeing proposed a 757 ASW version that lost out to the P-7 but could also have seen it in AEW, ELINT, VIP and even tanker transport versions.
A few years back, Rob and I over at Whiff did some 757s like that. I did the base line art and he did the military conversions and made profiles of them. http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,20663.msg424210.html#msg424210 (http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,20663.msg424210.html#msg424210) Starting from here and continuing on for many pages...
-
Excellent, I may need to join to have a look.
-
Didn't the Japanese adopt a 757 as an AEW platform?
-
767 AEW
-
And perhaps a RAF EP-8 as a more modern Rivet Joint airframe? Especially appropriate since the mod center (L3 Communications Integrated Systems Division of Greenville and Waco, TX) that does Rivet Joint aircraft also deals with EP-3's and has converted BBJ's and other airframes (the private 777 for a Saudi prince was really a piece of work).
Got one of those in the works, picked up some 'cheek' fairings the other day and I've talked with Densil at Welsh Models to see if I can buy a 737-800 without the decals as I'll get my own marking for it.
-
767 AEW
Got one in the stash --- in 1/72 scale
-
There was a rumour around about a decade ago that the USAF had a black programme for a LO tactical tanker, probably headed up by Lockheed. The idea was a 727 / 737 sized airframe but faster and using LO profiling / materials that could go into contested airspace and support all the F-22 / F-35 etc. Such a design would have been great fro MPA and other specialist roles. Can't help but think it would have ended up looking a bit like a Nimrod or a V-bomber though, with engines buried in the wing roots etc.
-
There was a rumour around about a decade ago that the USAF had a black programme for a LO tactical tanker, probably headed up by Lockheed. The idea was a 727 / 737 sized airframe but faster and using LO profiling / materials that could go into contested airspace and support all the F-22 / F-35 etc. Such a design would have been great fro MPA and other specialist roles. Can't help but think it would have ended up looking a bit like a Nimrod or a V-bomber though, with engines buried in the wing roots etc.
The study was called "MACK" and yes, the engines were buried that way. A think a couple pictures showed up in Aviation Week and I've attached a lo-res scan of one.
-
Excellent, thanks for that.
-
Am I they only one who has reservations about basically sending an AIRLINER to war? We could have built a both better and cheaper MMA by modifying and renovating Boneyard BUFFs... other than the love affair that the dip-ShipHighInTransit diplomats have with Commies, who especially hate and fear the B-52 by name.
-
I've always thought that a variation on the proposed "lambda-wing" design that was part of Lockheed's C-5 effort could give you a l-o stol aircraft (not on the C-5's scale, but something comparable with, say, a C-130. I've got a few ideas in the back of my head...
-
Always liked the Nimrod layout and thought a completely new airframe designed around the same concept as the Nimrod MR4/2000 would have been a better way to go for the money spent. Not a full LO but part way there and designed from the outset for MPA, ECR, tactical tanking etc. Maybe even a capability as a medium / long range cruise missile carrier thrown in.
-
Am I they only one who has reservations about basically sending an AIRLINER to war? We could have built a both better and cheaper MMA by modifying and renovating Boneyard BUFFs...
Worked well for the Nimrod, Orion, not to mention others. A B-52 based MPA would be far from economical plus would not be as effective given the role.
other than the love affair that the dip-ShipHighInTransit diplomats have with Commies, .
WTF?! How are comments like this of any use here?
-
I'm not all read-in on P-8. Do know from once working at Boeing (not on P-8).
1 > World wide maintenance infrastructure for 737 serves to lower opreational costs.
2 > P-8 is a fit for existing navy runways, taxiways, hangers.
-
Am I they only one who has reservations about basically sending an AIRLINER to war? We could have built a both better and cheaper MMA by modifying and renovating Boneyard BUFFs... other than the love affair that the dip-ShipHighInTransit diplomats have with Commies, who especially hate and fear the B-52 by name.
Airliners are built to much tougher basic strength standards. They have to be
to meet the regulations, as the average airliner is used on a daily basis, day in
day out, year after year, warplanes are not.
The B-52 is way too narrow and has the wrong layout for the consoles and
operators that are the most important part of an MMA, aircraft in that
role are not 'bomb trucks', nor do they need to be.
If you were someone who had really studied or worked in aerospace, rather than
the occupant of your mum's basement, you'd know all that.
-
Am I they only one who has reservations about basically sending an AIRLINER to war?
You quite likely may be the only one.
Airliners have been put into uniform and flown into harm's way and given stirling service since before the Second World War.
They've well proven themselves many times over in a multitude of military roles.
-
Airliners have gone to war for generations starting (IIRC) with the DC-3/C-47, Lockheed Electra/Hudson, Beechcraft Model 18/C-45, up to the B737/T-43/C-40/P-8 and so many in between a guy could write a book on it. I think the idea is pretty well proven to work. The P-3, derived from the Lockheed L-188 Electra, and the C-135 family derived from the B707 have served for over 50 years. Hmmm.... this could make a good book! I'm sure I've missed a few, just way to many to list here.
Besides, this provides lots of whiff material.
-
and the C-135 family derived from the B707 have served for over 50 years.
I think you'll find in this case it's the other way around, but your point is well taken --
-
Besides, this provides lots of whiff material.
Yes! Like, off the top of my head, an Il-96-based AWACS, or a Tu-204 based replacement for the Il-38...
-
and the C-135 family derived from the B707 have served for over 50 years.
I think you'll find in this case it's the other way around, but your point is well taken --
The 707 and 717(C-135) were parallel developments from the private venture 367-80
proof of concept, it was not a matter of one being derived from the other.
BTW, Boeing does not prefix their model numbers with a 'B', that is an ICAO
identifier that has become regularly misapplied.
-
The 707 and 717(C-135) were parallel developments from the private venture 367-80
proof of concept, it was not a matter of one being derived from the other.
I still find it odd that one is around 6" wider than the other. I'd have thought standardisation would have been much more sensible, but perhaps the demands of 'fail safe' as opposed to 'safe life' were involved there.
-
Despite taking a hiatus from this forum, I'll pop back long enough to answer PR19's question. Per the folks who designed and built them, 717 (KC-135) is closer to the original 367-80 spec, while 707 was redesigned because the airlines wanted more room inside the cabin.
But WTF do I know, since I "live in Mum's basement" according to some, whose knowledge of other members' backgrounds MIGHT be enough to fill the head of a pin.
-
The original -80 is the same width as the Model 367/377 at 132 ", the Air Force asked for a 12 inch increase
in diameter to 144", Boeing did so and hoped the airlines would be happy with the same width, because by
doing so Boeing hoped to use the KC-135 tooling. The airlines weren't satisfied and after losing an order to
the still in development DC-8, Boeing bowed to the inevitable and added another four inches to the cabin
giving the 707 width of 148".
per Pete Bowers', Boeing Aircraft since 1916, 1993 edition and other sources.
Dear T***y,
The Shadow knows. :icon_ninja:
-
If I remember correctly, it was the president of Pan-Am lobbying Boeing to match the DC-8's diameter. The reason for the increase was 148" wide gave room for a single aisle and three seats on each side, instead of only two seats on one side. That's a rather substantial increase in passengers.
-
If you were someone who had really studied or worked in aerospace, rather than
the occupant of your mum's basement, you'd know all that.
Was that really called for? Diamondback's own comments were bad enough, now you're just adding further heat, Jon. Greg has admonished him, there is no need to carry it further into personal attacks.
Diamondback, you do realise the world has moved on since the end of the Cold War? This isn't a political forum, so perhaps you should think about that before posting? We don't all share the same viewpoint on politics and your comments were unwarranted.
-
Full-rate production contract:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/26/us-boeing-poseidon-idUSBREA1O1XY20140226 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/26/us-boeing-poseidon-idUSBREA1O1XY20140226)
-
How come 16 aircraft will only cost the USN $2.1 billion, whereas the 8 for Australia will cost $3.6 billion
-
Overheads including maintenance equipment, tools, spares, training facilities and systems (including simulators). Basically all the costs that arise when introducing a new type into service, the USN has already paid these costs so follow batches pretty much only need to cover the aircraft.
-
Full-rate production contract:
[url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/26/us-boeing-poseidon-idUSBREA1O1XY20140226[/url] ([url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/26/us-boeing-poseidon-idUSBREA1O1XY20140226[/url])
'Spy planes'.....? ???
-
Reuters needs writers. ;D
-
P-8 update from Mr. Rogoway:
Exclusive: P-8 Poseidon Flies With Shadowy Radar System Attached (http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/exclusive-p-8-poseidon-flies-with-shadowy-radar-system-1562912667)
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--r7JK179K--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/o04hgxhpn2u5f823tnme.jpg)
-
That looks as streamlined as a brick ;D
-
P-8s are definitely getting to be a common sight in the skies over Jacksonville.
Cheers,
Logan
-
U.S. Navy awards Boeing contract for 20 more P-8A maritime patrol aircraft
Boeing will further equip the U.S. Navy and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) with maritime patrol capabilities, building 20 more P-8A Poseidon aircraft following a $2.5 billion U.S. Navy order announced on Thursday (January 28th).
Read more here (http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2016/01/us-navy-awards-boeing-contract-for-20-more-p8a.html).
-
U.S. Navy awards Boeing contract for 20 more P-8A maritime patrol aircraft
Boeing will further equip the U.S. Navy and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) with maritime patrol capabilities, building 20 more P-8A Poseidon aircraft following a $2.5 billion U.S. Navy order announced on Thursday (January 28th).
Read more here ([url]http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2016/01/us-navy-awards-boeing-contract-for-20-more-p8a.html[/url]).
So now all 8 RAAF P-8s are contracted for. Now to see if the Defence White paper identifies the need for another 4 that are on the cards.
-
Essentially they have added another 7 (4+3) thus bringing the RAAF P-8 fleet eventually up to 15.
-
First RAAF P-8A (click picture for more details including video):
(http://www.navyrecognition.com/images/stories/news/2016/may/Australia_1st_P-8A_Poseidon_MPA_completes_maiden_flight.jpg) (http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4015)
-
Official Handover:
(http://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/4ee58d58-84e7-11e6-9971-0c04527d79d0-2040x1072.jpg)
-
Looks nice and spiffy. When is the last RAAF Orion likely to bow out?
-
Looks nice and spiffy. When is the last RAAF Orion likely to bow out?
2018 is the plan. The first to be retired (-663) died back in 2014:
(http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/albums/Orion-A9-663/Orion_A9_633_20141020raaf8201782_009.sized.jpg)
-
That's a sad scene. :(
I trust at least one or two are earmarked for museums?
-
Couldn't agree more. Do hope a few are earmarked.
-
Wedgetail radar on P-8 as an EP-8 if more AWACS aircraft are needed? I could also see ELINT EP-8s with 'lumps and bumps' like the EP-3 has.
-
Just read recently that ep-3's will be replaced by drones.☠️ No more VQ-1 or 2
Will try to find where I read that post it later.
-
Just read recently that ep-3's will be replaced by drones.☠️ No more VQ-1 or 2
Will try to find where I read that post it later.
I would imagine they will first replace some of the older and more worn EP-3Es with MQ-4C Triton "Broad Area Maritime Surveillance" UAVs but I can still see the need for a crewed presence. At one time, the US Navy and Army were collaborating on a common new ELINT platform, but the selected option proved to be too small when the requirements, including power and cooling, for the necessary equipment fit were finalized and that project died. To the best of my knowledge, the USN has an effort underway to replace their EP-3Es with new, business-jet-derived, aircraft. Given the relationship between the P-8 and various BBJ variants, I could see an EP-8 being in the running. It certainly would not hurt that the company currently maintaining, upgrading, and converting (P-3 to EP-3) the present fleet also has considerable experience with BBJs.
-
See here (http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2009/april/ts_sf03.pdf) for some info on Boeings thoughts a few years back on a P-8 version for EP-X.
-
Their thoughts still make sense today. One thing they don't mention is that using the P-8 fuselage will give considerably more cabin room than the EP-3 has. Fully staffed and operational, the only aircraft I can think that is tighter on space is the E-2 (I've been in the cabins of both). Also, given the very similar, if not identical, cross-sections between the KC-135 and 737, I could see a lot of the Rivet Joint antennas fitting an EP-8 without undue problem.
-
Wedgetail radar on P-8 as an EP-8 if more AWACS aircraft are needed?
I don't know if that would work in reality (the whiffers is a different matter...) as I understand that the Wedgetail E-7s are fairly close to weight limits (I may be wrong in this) and that the P-8 also adds more weight therefore you may end up with one heavy bird.
-
Installation of the tophat radar on Wedgetail is a major undertaking.
All of the fuselage frames in way of the installation are removed and
replaced with frames of increased section, depth and stronger material.
New skins are also used, then you have the installation of the new
raceways for the massive number of new heavy gauge cables for the
DC power supply to the radar elements, plus a new internal bulkhead
with heavy shielding/insulation, there is a hatch, but the area is a no-go
while the radar system is operating.
Adding the Wedgetail radar to a P-8 would be a major redesign.
-
in another words, such would be a whif only; no real world possibility. You would probably have an easier time installing something equivalent to the latest E-2 radar on a P-8 (witness such an installation on the P-3). One that could definitely get a reaction would be a P-8 equivalent of the NP-3D with that huge dorsal radome faired into the vertical tail.
-
Yep, they walked us all through the structural changes when I transferred to the program. The amount of rework was crazy.
Remind me to scan my early config drawing that included probe-refueling. Makes it look very different.
-
I'm quite familiar with the structural mods done to mount the "M&M" radome on the bottom of the EP-3 so I can well imagine what installing that radar took.
-
First RAAF P-8 arrives in Australia:
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2016/S20162938/20161116raaf8157095_068.t582cf543.m2400.x07001418.jpg)
-
From what I am hearing p-8s are scary good
-
And I sure see a lot of them in the skies over my city, so their reliability rate has to be halfway decent.
Cheers,
Logan
-
Boeing Receives $1.5 Billion P-8A Poseidon Contract From U.S. Navy
ARLINGTON, Va., March 30, 2020 — The U.S. Navy awarded The Boeing Company a $1.5 billion production contract for the next 18 P-8A Poseidon aircraft. The contract includes eight aircraft for the U.S. Navy, six aircraft for the Republic of Korea Navy and four aircraft for the Royal New Zealand Air Force.
The Republic of Korea Navy and Royal New Zealand Air Force acquired the aircraft through the Foreign Military Sales process and will receive the same P-8A Poseidon variant designed and produced for the U.S. Navy. The Royal New Zealand Air Force is expected to begin receiving aircraft in 2022 and the Republic of Korea Navy is expected to begin receiving aircraft in 2023.
-
Good chance for Canadian ones in the future too.
RAAF ones are going well:
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2017/S20170152/20170201raaf8185068_0067.t5893e678.m2400.xnFrJjvnF.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2017/S20170152/20170201raaf8185068_0194.t5893e66e.m2400.xAZSnxG_c.jpg)
-
Coming soon:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cR-TfBT_jIg/XoKsrpzmcuI/AAAAAAABLt8/hM75TITbwWggQmvblhxLbMK_u6W_MY9_gCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/QGLO6X3TTRGDZFIK4OUFT2CPAY.jpg)
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2019-06/P-8%20A4%20Factsheet.pdf (https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2019-06/P-8%20A4%20Factsheet.pdf)
-
Social Media post by RNZAF:
By the numbers. All our Royal New Zealand Air Force aircraft have a unique serial number that follows our Defence Force convention. An important step in the construction of our new P-8A fleet is allocating the tail numbers, which will have the numbers NZ4801 – 04.
Broken down this means:
✚ NZ – the prefix for NZDF
✚ 4 – denotes the aircraft’s role of maritime, our current P-3K2 fleet uses a 4 in the same way
✚ 8 – this denotes the aircraft type in this case 8 was available and made sense to use it given it is a P-8A fleet
✚ 01-04 – these final two numbers are the sequential tail numbers.
Serial numbers previously allocated to RNZAF maritime aircraft include:
✚ NZ4001 to NZ4056 | PB2B-1 Catalina
✚ NZ4101 to NZ4120 | Short Sunderland MK III and MR.5
✚ NZ4201 to NZ4206 | Lockheed P-3K Orion
✚ NZ4501 to NZ4639 | Lockheed PV-1 and B-34 Ventura
✚ NZ4701 to NZ4704 | Lockheed PV-2 Harpoon
(https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4D22AQFtheXNnzmLlA/feedshare-shrink_800/0?e=1594857600&v=beta&t=GDcFckOeqVzmVjWloFQ14z0DBDxVWQagvpox7qyNrrA)
-
Via Twitter
In a day for European nations buying American, Germany has signed for five @BoeingDefense P-8 maritime patrol aircraft via the US FMS process. DSCA notice in March gave a value of $1.77bn for the deal, inc equipment and support.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E5JBkJpXwBADGjM?format=jpg)
-
Anyone want to do an Aéronavale version as a replacement for the Bréguet Atlantique 2? ;)
-
Anyone want to do an Aéronavale version as a replacement for the Bréguet Atlantique 2?
Makes me wonder, what is the equivalent French expression to "raised hackles"? ;D
-
Anyone want to do an Aéronavale version as a replacement for the Bréguet Atlantique 2?
Makes me wonder, what is the equivalent French expression to "raised hackles"? ;D
"hérissés"
-
"hérissés"
Perfect! To bristle and be cringe-inducing at the same time ;D
-
Anyone want to profile it?
-
Anyone want to profile it?
No but I'll do a French Nimrod. #ShutupElsa
-
Any 144 scale kits that could be used?
-
Welsh Models do a 1/72 scale multi media kit.
-
Any 144 scale kits that could be used?
Scratchaeronautics and Contrails Models both offer(ed?) 1/144 kits
-
Sweet!
So when's the RCAF getting some?
A Canadian one in the dark CP-140 scheme would look good:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Lockheed_CP-140_Aurora%2C_Canada_-_Air_Force_AN2283558.jpg)
-
Any 144 scale kits that could be used?
The P-8 is based on the 737-800, external visible mods are minor and Revell
has a 737-800 kit. There’s not really any reason to track down one of the
“overpriced” OOP resin kits as all it takes is some simple modelling skills to
make the conversion.
-
Any 144 scale kits that could be used?
Zvezda have a new tool 1/144 737-800 injection kit, check out Hannants website.
-
On offer from Boeing:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FLQCCrsXMAAhTKP?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
CFBV
-
Well -Boeing is in the sh!thouse with the particular government we have at the moment.
But I'd like to see the Kawasaki P.1 offered --- ;)
-
But I'd like to see the Kawasaki P.1 offered --- ;)
It might be offered but IMHO safe money would be with the P-8
-
Welsh Models do a 1/72 scale multi media kit.
Yes they do, build with quite a few mods
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51110949598_4e72567a0a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kSuYCW)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51111039646_acb15a379a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kSvrpu)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51112203164_fa0766c276_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kSBph9)
-
Nice. :smiley:
-
Nice. :smiley:
ditto!
-
(Canadian) Defence Minister Anand considering multi-billion dollar purchase of U.S. built surveillance aircraft
Via the Ottawa Citizen.
Defence Minister Anita Anand is considering whether to push forward a multi-billion-dollar proposal to purchase new surveillance aircraft for the Canadian Forces.
The proposal to buy between eight and 12 P-8 Poseidon aircraft from Boeing in the U.S. is being examined, according to industry and defence sources. But whether it moves forward to cabinet still has to be decided.
Source: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/defence-minister-anand-considering-multi-billion-dollar-purchase-of-u-s-built-surveillance-aircraft
-
First RNZAF P-8 arrives:
(https://static1.simpleflyingimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/newzealandp-8a-002.jpg?q=50&fit=contain&w=1140&h=&dpr=1.5)
-
EP-8E conversion using EP-3E conversion pieces?
-
I didn't realize how big the P3 is..or how small the P8 is.
-
I didn't realize how big the P3 is..or how small the P8 is.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/udsLCxsoY8A/maxresdefault.jpg)
-
P-8 is definitely bigger and wider than the P-3. The EP-3 has the second most crowded fuselage I know, exceeded only by the E-2.
-
P-8 is definitely bigger and wider than the P-3. The EP-3 has the second most crowded fuselage I know, exceeded only by the E-2.
Shackletons and Nimrods must run the EP-3 close
-
Deadline March 27
Canada requests costing on possible fleet of 16 Boeing P-8A aircraft
The Canadian government has submitted a letter of request (LOR) to the U.S. government for the acquisition price of 16 Boeing built P-8A Poseidon aircraft to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) fleet of 14 CP-140 Aurora maritime patrol aircraft.
In a statement, the government said it had submitted the LOR after gathering feedback from a request for information (RFI) issued to the defense and aerospace industry in February 2022. Based on the RFI, the government contends the P-8A is “the only currently available aircraft that meets all of the operational requirements” for what it is calling the Canadian Multi-Mission Aircraft (CMMA) project to provide the RCAF with a next-generation anti-submarine warfare and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) platform.
(https://assets.skiesmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/MicrosoftTeams-image-2-e1679960021686-1000x672.jpg)
Source: https://skiesmag.com/news/canada-requests-costing-possible-fleet-16-boeing-p-8a-aircraft/
-
The U.S. State Department has approved the possible sale of 16 Boeing P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft and related equipment to Canada for approximately US$5.9 billion.
The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) issued a notification to Congress on June 27 of the potential foreign military sale.
The Canadian government submitted a letter of request to the U.S. government in March 2023 for the acquisition price of the 16 Boeing-built aircraft, which would replace the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) fleet of 14 CP-140 Aurora aircraft, a variant of the Lockheed Martin P-3 Orion.
More here: https://skiesmag.com/news/state-department-approves-possible-sale-p8a-aircraft-equipment-canada/
-
Via FB. Builder is Steve Morin
Another "What If". BPK 1/72 Boeing P8 Poseidon. Decals are from the kit and are supplemented by Andrew's prototype Low Vis RCAF decals for this aircraft. Fictitious aircraft 208112 of the Non fictitious 407 Demon Squadron (Other Sqd's are also provided with his decals).
I think he hit this one out of the park. I gently scraped off the kit's red engine intake warnings that I had previously put on and installed Andrews decals.
I used promotional pictures from online for potential Canadian purchase of this aircraft . I didn't know where to put the Forces Canadiennes/Canadian Forces decal that also incorporates the small Canada flag as I couldn't find pictures of this so I put it above the wing root area just aft of the over wing door.
Paint is overall Revell Light Grey Silk Matt (Spray). It's probably not what Canada will opt for but I think this works great and looks identical to the Navy P-8 colors.
This kit is not for the beginner as practically every joint had to be trial fitted repeatedly. lots of filler and sanding. The scratch built weapons bay really makes this model pop.
The kit decals are very thin and have a tendency to bunch up; however they are not fragile. The kit decals I had to rework the fwd R/H service door as the decal is too big. I cut this in 4 and pieced it back together to fit the model's door. I did the same with the cockpit window frames which bunched up while trying to apply.
The angle of the main door decal at the top seemed wrong but caught this too late and will have to live with it. The kit decals do not include anything for the 4 missiles.
Now to figure out how to hang it from the ceiling without knocking some antennas off.
(https://scontent.fxds1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/356812089_10230847019025734_6064318733483871113_n.jpg?stp=cp6_dst-jpg&_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=Ch4J_w5z-ksAX_kJwrv&_nc_ht=scontent.fxds1-1.fna&oh=00_AfC511qdA0C__jQtU8YB2Xf9YnqC7gZukMYGi2FRE9Zwyg&oe=64A4CC90)
(https://scontent.fxds1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/356825666_10230847022065810_6341584020935789649_n.jpg?stp=cp6_dst-jpg&_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=Ns1-sl_wsNYAX9YpdNp&_nc_ht=scontent.fxds1-1.fna&oh=00_AfAGwLDqbk8fMOH1swxtVvHIY1Sx6m2-t5-5t_7h-MfHgQ&oe=64A60630)