-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
The Monster COD thread (homage to the C-2A Greyhound)
- Thread starter MigF4
- Start date
They never bought 48, unless you count the "blue" dollars that buy aircraft for the Marines.
Isn't there a new E-2? The one with the 8-blade prop? Wouldn't they just not put on a radome and call it a C-2? The V-22 might be great, but that would seem to be a ready made, economical solution.
1. All Marine aviation programs (except for certain C2 and Air Defense) are paid for by so-called blue dollars (in support of green) programmed by N88 (as in OPNAV) and they indeed have paid for the MV-22 Osprey, but no blue dollars of any kind have been programmed for the Navy HV-22 in any year through 2013 and that is as far as programming goes at present moment.
2. The E-2 and C-2 are being retrofitted with NP2000 props. A E-2 sans radome is not a COD candidate as the internal volume is insufficent for the COD requirements. There was a program over a decade ago called Common Support Aircraft (CSA) in which a green truck airframe would be used for the AEW, ASW and COD missions, but it never quite off the ground and the AEW folks decided to pursue AHE (Advanced Hawekeye), the ASW folks (ASW) were shown the door and the might COD soldiers on. Obe of the biggest issues is moldline for a common aircraft. The COD needs internal volume that runs contrary to the AEW mission that needs the hulking radome and room internally for radar consoles and operators. Conformal AESA was considered but the technology was still beyond grasp.
Well, like I said, was going to buy or planning to buy, whatever. My point was through the yearly discussions of replacements for the COD, the V-22 is at the top of the list. The COD is getting the 8 bladed prop but that doesn't necessarily make the airframe last longer, increase the number of landings allowed on said airframe. It's also getting a glasss cockpit........all polishing a turd. COD's are being SLEP'ed as well but that delays retirement until 2018 or so. Grumman has said it would take 4 years to make the first C-2B. How long to make a V-22? The most likely scenario is the Navy will do nothing, let the COD fly until the end and then, make some rash, knee jerk decision. Now, if we hung bomb racks on the COD, not to drop bombs but give the impression that it could, the money would come flowing in I'm sure. Not my problem anyway, I'm a former COD guy, never to fly them again.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Why would it take Grumman 4 years to spool up for production? Would it REALLY take that long, or would they want a "premium" to crank the COD line up in 1 year when we shoot ourselves in the rear, and its 2016 with no CODs on order?
I could be wrong but isn't the C-2A the oldest T/M/S flying? I know they were re procured, but wasn't that just the original C-2A with whatever AFC's had been incorporated by then?
C-130s are older and E-2s about the same age, but they are on the E-2C with the E-2D having its maiden flight next month..
I could be wrong but isn't the C-2A the oldest T/M/S flying? I know they were re procured, but wasn't that just the original C-2A with whatever AFC's had been incorporated by then?
C-130s are older and E-2s about the same age, but they are on the E-2C with the E-2D having its maiden flight next month..
heyjoe said:
Out of curiosity... what would take 2 years to build? Won't they roll off the same line as the Hawkeye? I know they are not the same, but they are similar.
VetteMuscle427 said:
Building aircraft is a time consuming process so 2 years is routine for any time aircraft on average. Missiles also take a long time as well. Some of the time is pure paperwork drills. Multi-year contracts help keep the cost down and speed up the sourcing of subcontracts. Any aircraft built today uses parts made in virtually every state as well as overseas (that is on purpose to gain Congressional support and international partners).
heyjoe said:
Even for an aircraft that is proven, with plans that are available and parts that really shouldn't take along time to produce? I just don't get it. Weren't they able to restart the C-2 production in the 80s on the drop of a hat?
I'm probably just being naive as to how inefficient the gov't can be.
I can see where the people would see it as inefficient, and certainly there is an element of that, but you have to remember that many (if not, unfortunately, all) of these procedures were implemented in the name of spending money wisely, and were introduced as a result of hard lessons learned (A-12 and Commanche are easy examples).
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Sometimes as an engineer, with all the rapid prototyping tools available, and seeing what was done with paper and wood mockups in WWII, it boggles my mind it takes so long.
I know a good chunk of it is bureaucratic red tape... But damn.. The C-2 is already designed.. We just need new ones with upgraded avionics.
HJ, not disagreeing with what you said, its just the engineer in me going "this could be done FASTER"..
I know a good chunk of it is bureaucratic red tape... But damn.. The C-2 is already designed.. We just need new ones with upgraded avionics.
HJ, not disagreeing with what you said, its just the engineer in me going "this could be done FASTER"..
MasterBates said:
Believe me, I'm not defending why it takes so long, just stating what I know to be the case. I have actually been to several production lines including that of the E-2 and it's virtually hand built. Actually, aircraft are built at lightspeed compared to Aircraft Carriers.
MasterBates said:
I'm gonna go with what heyjoe said cause I really don't have a clue.
MasterBates said:
The design is old but the C-2A(R) built between 1985 and 1989 were brand new aircraft. You can tell the difference by the hump in the tail. The original C-2A had angled shape while the "modern" C-2 has more of whale's tail look to it.
