Cutting back on fuel consumption...

[HAL Pilot]

^ Wow. Back in my day, I never heard of a front office limiting onsta engine shutdowns. We always shut down an engine whenever possible even if we didn't think we would need the fuel savings to complete the flight. You could never had too much gas plus it helped the squadron's Optar.

 

[PropStop]

A 21.5hr mission in the war pig? I'm dubious about that one. I'd have to run the charts. I imagine that the planes back then didn't have nearly as much gear on them, so they'd be lighter. Still, i'm doubtful.

I think the best I ever saw was a 13.1. I'll have to check my log book. I know that back in the day, getting to 14 was not uncommon.

 

[Python]

any P-3 guys wanna confirm this? i mean, it IS wikipedia and highly doubt improper info to be posted...

"Engine loiter shutdown
On many missions, an engine is shut down (usually engine 1 - the port outer engine) once on station to conserve fuel and extend the time aloft (and range when at low level). On occasion, both outboard engines can be shut down, aircraft weight, weather, and remaining fuel permitting. Long border patrol missions can last over ten hours and may include extra crew. The record for a P-3 is a 21.5 hour flight undertaken by the Royal New Zealand Air Force's No. 5 Squadron in 1972.
Engine 1 is the primary candidate for loiter shutdown because it is the only one without a generator, and is not needed for electrical power. Eliminating the exhaust from engine 1 also improves visibility from the observer stations on the port side of the aircraft."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-3_Orion

That's interesting. On summer cruise they shut down engine 4 and said that was the standard thing to do. Uh oh.

 

[Single Seat]

Ya, my fuel conservation is pulling the throttles out of blower at 230 knots vice 270 on take off.

Bottom line in the TACAIR world on the boat... once it goes in the jet it's either burned or dumped, and you don't launch with less than a full bag.

 

[Flugelman]

Do the VP squadrons still jump thru their asses at the end of the fiscal quarter fueling and defueling planes to make the dollars come out even? :icon_rage

I wish I had a dollar for every man-hour we expended (wasted, IMHO) doing that. I could retire... oh, wait...

 

[Single Seat]

We track OPTAR by flight hours now, not fuel.

 

[HAL Pilot]

We track OPTAR by flight hours now, not fuel.

Flight hours was the standard but fuel consumption was part of it. I.e. average fuel consumption per flight hour versus the price of fuel. OPTAR available (i.e. flight hours available) constantly changed with according to what the wing was telling us was the price of the fuel.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Do the VP squadrons still jump thru their asses at the end of the fiscal quarter fueling and defueling planes to make the dollars come out even? :icon_rage

I wish I had a dollar for every man-hour we expended (wasted, IMHO) doing that. I could retire... oh, wait...

My first tour (1985-89) we'd just offer up end of quarter cross countries to whoever wanted wherever they wanted.

We played your game my DH tour (1995-96).

 

[Mumbles]

I did a 13.9 once....and it was painful. We also had a crew get hammered because they elected to loiter 2 while up at altitude monitoring BT buoys for a water sampling flight that the TSC had told the said crew was essential to the upcoming joint Allied exercise. At one point, while cruising at 1.52, the PPC of the flight told me that they were only burning <3000lbs an hour and were back on deck with 6000K VFR. Everything was texbook NATOPS. (2 engine loiter in Ch. 8, Normal Procedures, et.al.) So... we had an all aircrew meeting discussing the ramifications loitering 2 motors... I respected those guys for wanting to PLE to get the job done. But there is no way I would have had the balls to do it. I think it should be taken out of Normal Procedures.

 

[zab1001]

I did a 13.9 once....and it was painful. We also had a crew get hammered because they elected to loiter 2 while up at altitude monitoring BT buoys for a water sampling flight that the TSC had told the said crew was essential to the upcoming joint Allied exercise. At one point, while cruising at 1.52, the PPC of the flight told me that they were only burning <3000lbs an hour and were back on deck with 6000K VFR. Everything was texbook NATOPS. (2 engine loiter in Ch. 8, Normal Procedures, et.al.) So... we had an all aircrew meeting discussing the ramifications loitering 2 motors... I respected those guys for wanting to PLE to get the job done. But there is no way I would have had the balls to do it. I think it should be taken out of Normal Procedures.

I've read and re-read your post a few times and I guess I'm missing something.

Was the meeting held in order to review the procedures in order to give everyone a refresher and remind crews that it's a valid option? Or did someone have some issue with the decision to do it? Why were they hammered? That's bullshit.

I'm also unclear about the issue with 1.52. ****EDIT**** sorry, I understand what you mean now

Legit questions, not nit-picking.

 

[HAL Pilot]

We we in the Gulf of Aden flying out of Djibouti when no one knew where it was. The PPC decided to loiter a second engine and the FE says we're too heavy. They debate and the PPC wins. #4 shuts down and we start going down about a hundred feet a minute. Restart #4, wait 30 minutes and shut it down again. No biggie.

We did 2 engine loiters all the time my first tour. Not so much my DH tour as the Soviets had gone away and the missions were shorter. (Except for over Bosnia. But we kept the engines running there for different reasons...)

However 2 engine loiters were routine and available at the PPC's discretion during both my tours. Did this change?

 

[zab1001]

My favorite: stray voltage on restart might fire off a Maverick....

right.

 

[Mumbles]

^Zab...the AACM was called around mid day on deployment after the Peeps had gone through the ringer with the CO/XO/OPsO all morning long...and he really had his tail between his legs. Because we had an all double anchor front office... they deferred to the OPsO for all things pilot related...and the consensus was/ still is....that he thought that he was God's gift to P-3s and that even though he had loitered 2 as a JO...that it was in extremis on a SAR flight and no on else should ever dare try this. PPC is a P-3 IP and went to instruct in CC. FE was a salty dog Senior Chief that had over 8000 hours...and the MC/TACCO is now a Dept. Head in Jax. The whole crew ORM'd it prior to shutting down #4 and got the job done. But they still were excoriated in front of the entire squadron. The rationale for the meeting was not because someone had taken exception to Ch. 8 procedures...

 

[zab1001]

Mumbles, sounds like fodder for the "What makes a bad leader?" thread. And maybe one on why Front Offices should never "be the same type."

Over a fucking 2 engine loiter. Sandy vag.

 

[Mumbles]

And how.....

the said Skipper just made O-6.... even after half of his squadron practically mutinied from the way he ran it in to the dirt.