Following a few deployments with the P-3C, my squadron transitioned to the new P-8A Poseidon. The P-8A is derived from the Boeing 737. The aircraft features a Boeing 737-800 fuselage mated to 737-900 wings and is equipped with raked wingtips optimized for low altitude flight and long endurance. In place of a cargo hold, the aircraft boasts additional fuel tanks and a weapons bay. The reliability, speed, and sensor capabilities equate to a significant improvement over the legacy aircraft (the P-3). In the Poseidon, the Navy married advanced sensors and communications connectivity with a modern, highly reliable and efficient airframe that already existed on the commercial marketplace.
If I sound like a Poseidon lover, well then consider me guilty. I am, and admit it honestly. The aircraft is powerful, reliable, and easy to fly. It was a challenge transitioning from a straight wing turboprop to a high altitude, swept wing jet, but I personally found the P-8A to be intuitive and comfortable to fly. The largest difference is not in flight characteristics, but rather in how the pilot interfaces with the aircraft. The P-3C is flown hands-on, with little if any automation. In the Poseidon, the pilot utilizes the Flight Management Computer and a highly advanced coupled autopilot to fly the jet. Whether flying on airway routes or positioning the aircraft to employ sensors, the Poseidon utilizes high levels of automation. This is not harder or easier than flying hands-on, simply different, and requires a different approach.
The tougher part about the jet is acting as a tactical operator and employing the sensors of the aircraft. The P-8A is revolutionary when it comes to sensor management, data fusion, and connectivity. The challenge for operators is not having insufficient sensor performance, but rather how to manage so many capable sensors, process the information, and transmit actionable data to commanders through a variety of communications networks and datalinks.
The P-8A boasts five mission crew workstations, all of which feature dual reconfigurable touchscreen displays and data entry keyboards. The ability to do any job from any workstation makes load sharing possible and is indeed critical to success during a mission. For example, during an information, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions we might have extra electronic warfare operators in the seats scanning for radar emitters while another operator scans the radar and maps where those emitters are located. Conversely, during an ASW mission we can place extra acoustic operators in the seats to interpret sonar signals and track a submarine. The flexibility is extremely impressive.
I won't claim the P-8A does everything better than the P-3C. For one, the controls feel very different between the two aircraft. I find the P-3C to be a bit crisper on the controls, especially at low altitude and in the landing pattern. This isn't surprising, given the Orion's thick, straight wing and the swept wing and spoilers on the Poseidon. Also, the lack of a Magnetic Anomaly Detector (MAD) aboard the P-8A is a drawback.
Many folks ask if I feel less comfortable with two engines in the P-8A rather than four in the P-3C. Realistically, I'll take Poseidon any day. The reliability of the CFM-56 turbofans on the jet is generations ahead of the T-56 turboprops on the Orion. CFM-56 shutdown rates are on the order of three per million flight hours. In fact, P-8A has been flying for more than three years and has yet to have an in-flight engine shutdown. I'll take the reliability of the P-8A every time over the P-3C.
Overall, I've found the P-8A allows crew-members to focus more on tactical employment and getting every ounce of performance out of the jet's sensors and weapons. While the Orion is a very safe airplane statistically, it was designed in another age with different design philosophies. It's very hands-on and user intensive especially for pilots and flight engineers. Because of the fact that the P-3C is honestly trying to break, catch on fire, or generally kill you during any given flight, we have to devote a great deal of energy simply to operating it safely. This isn't a hit on the P-3C, any airplane of that generation is like that, and the fact that some of these birds are over 40 years old is a testament to the engineers who designed them and our maintainers who keep them flying. Because reliability is baked into the P-8, we can focus more on tactical effectiveness. The result is higher situational awareness (SA) and much better mission performance in the new jet.