No surprise, DTO&E bashes P-8A that admiral said was wonderful

( "Help me! I can't tell the truth." )

The new ASW aircraft that U.S. Navy recently claimed was better than an P-3 is not.

According to a Bloomberg news report, the US Department of Defense (Pentagon) has found that the US Navy’s version of the aircraft, the P-8A, is ineffective at both surveillance, and in detecting and destroying submarines.

Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s chief weapons inspector, has reported that the P-8A “is not effective for the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance mission and is not effective for wide area anti-submarine search”, according to Bloomberg, which cites Gilmore’s annual report on major weapons.

The trends of the P-8A would make this no surprise for anyone following the program. Including:

In 2008, the U.S. Navy deleted the requirement for the P-8A to be equipped with magnetic anomaly detection (MAD) equipment. This was part of an effort to reduce P-8A aircraft weight by 3,500 lb to improve aircraft range and endurance. P-8s for the Indian Navy will continue to retain MAD.

Then the USN tried to sell that event as value-added.

India's appears to be OK with the reduced range.

Along with a previous post on improving the U.S. Navy, I would add one of the first steps is that admirals stop lying to congress and the public.

This from DOD/IG last year. I am curious how many waivers a future enemy allows for?

Other analysis? With a properly upgraded P-3, both platforms should complement each other. ASW and maritime recon is important enough to have both platforms.

I would rather have the P-3 and the P-8.

Compared to some of the other gross stupidity (like two vendors for the failed LCS).