WI/PC. NIMROD bought by Australia/Canada/S Africa & NZ.

Speaking of endurance .... one Argus flew a 31 hour mission ...... on internal fuel!
Argus never had inflight refuelling probes.
 
For Australia the timing is close to being right, the RAAF selected the P3B in November 1964 and the first aircraft was delivered by January 1969. This aligns closely with the British decision to go with the Nimrod in February 1965 and first aircraft entered service in October 1969. The big question is what risk the RAAF is taking by being a launch operator of the Nimrod compared to the mature P3B.
 
I think Australia was one of the intended possible customers for a P-3 AWACS when it was first designed.

I don't know if they still have them but the US Coast Guard used to operate E-2s and maybe they still do.

I doubt there are any surplus E-3s. Those things are based on 707 airframes, they are probably close to falling out of the sky as it is.
 
I think Australia was one of the intended possible customers for a P-3 AWACS when it was first designed.

I don't know if they still have them but the US Coast Guard used to operate E-2s and maybe they still do.

I doubt there are any surplus E-3s. Those things are based on 707 airframes, they are probably close to falling out of the sky as it is.


The E-3 design was based on the 707, but all the E-3 airframes themselves were new builds. They won't be "falling out of the sky" anytime soon.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Thanks for the information. It is interesting that the DHS preferred creating a P-3 variant to buying stock E2s or an E3. Was it really cheaper, or did they want something with more range than an E2 and with better short field performance than an E3?

Edit: Read a little more and it probably was cheaper since the airframes were surplus P-3Bs. New build P3-AEW variants would presumably been more expensive.

I think the modification was initially a Lockheed project for nonNATO allies looking for something a little less costly than an E-3. They probably absorbed some of the development costs as IRAD.

Best,
 
I recall reading about the P3 AEW in 'The Australian' newspaper when I was still at school in the late 80s. It came off the back of a remark about AEW by then Defence Minister Kim Beazley following the Kangaroo 87 air defence exercise "... with it you win, without it you lose." This of course lead to a flurry of media activity about this new AEW thing, in particular the massive cost of the E3 and the massive unsuitability in the RAAF context of the E2. The P3 AEW was seen as a nice compromise of the cost of the E2 with the endurance approaching the E3.
 
Top