E-2 Hawkeye avionics on E-1B Tracer airframe?

[Scott Kenny]

Yes, I was just wondering whether you could drop other "modules" or whether this further weight reduction would mean a redesign of the whole electronics suite.

I'm reasonably confident of being able to drop one crew position and display set.

I'm not confident at all of being able to drop more than that, outside of a massive data link down to the ship and doing all the air traffic control work on the ship. And that puts a limit on the distance the plane can be away from the ship.

 

[TomS]

I'm reasonably confident of being able to drop one crew position and display set.

I'm not confident at all of being able to drop more than that, outside of a massive data link down to the ship and doing all the air traffic control work on the ship. And that puts a limit on the distance the plane can be away from the ship.

Having worked with an E-2 NFO, my sense is that trying to run the thing with only two guys in the trunk would be painful. The three "guys in back" are each doing different but essential tasks. Described here, with a dose of the usual Naval Aviator bravado:

Confessions Of An E-2C Hawkeye Radar Operator

The life of the often overlooked "quarterback" of the air wing that goes to work in a dimly lit flying tube to coordinate chaotic air wars from above.

www.twz.com

 

[Scott Kenny]

Having worked with an E-2 NFO, my sense is that trying to run the thing with only two guys in the trunk would be painful. The three "guys in back" are each doing different but essential tasks. Described here, with a dose of the usual Naval Aviator bravado:

Confessions Of An E-2C Hawkeye Radar Operator

The life of the often overlooked "quarterback" of the air wing that goes to work in a dimly lit flying tube to coordinate chaotic air wars from above.

www.twz.com

Having read that, yeah, you'd lose a lot more capability than I thought.

Still might have to do it for weight, but ugh that would be the epitome of suck.

 

[orlovsky]

Further to consider from the story: The E-2 is packed with electronics and the crew. Even with one crew member less this will not make it fit in the smaller E-1 airframe.

I think the only plausible way is an improvement of the E-1, be it with specific equipment or with bits taken from the E-2 suite if possible.

If the E-1 used vacuum tubes electronics there is literally a lot of room for improvement.

 

[apparition13]

Continuing the weight mystery: The S-3 AEW would integrate the E-2C avionics and with extra fuel tanks be 7300 lbs heavier than the S-3A:



As this includes ~4000 lbs of external fuel and an additional crew member, the weight gain would be ~3000 lbs.

For the ES-3A, 3000 lbs of ASW equipment would be deleted:

Air Force Magazine

www.google.at

So ~6000 lbs of AEW avionics. Of course just a rough guess, as all those numbers are fuzzy.

The article says that's for the Elint version that was deployed later. I've seen mentions and illustrations of an AEW S-3, but no numbers.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The article says that's for the Elint version that was deployed later. I've seen mentions and illustrations of an AEW S-3, but no numbers.

Right. But the ES-3A removed all the ASW gear, so it's a useful reference to us in terms of how much weight of gear is coming out of the S3s.

 

[orlovsky]

3-views from 'Grumman Aircraft since 1919' by René J Francillon, Putnam 1989.
The lower right-hand corner shows two scale-bars ...
- upper bar from the original E-1B drawing
- lower bar from the original E-2C drawing
... to indicate to what extent modifying the E-2C drawing to the E-1B drawing's scale was succesful.

I put the E-1B over the E-2 and was surprised how small the fuselage of the Tracer is: narrower and the useful area much shorter:




Comparing the internal layout:

E-1: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2010/11/trader-and-tracer.html diagram at the end

E-2: Lou Drendel, "E-2 Hawkeye Illustrated" on Kindle - I might well buy it, but it has a free preview with cutaways of the E-2 internal layout you can ckeck.

Result: There is really very little room on the E-1B in comparison.

 

[_Del_]

I think the only plausible way is an improvement of the E-1, be it with specific equipment or with bits taken from the E-2 suite if possible.

If the E-1 used vacuum tubes electronics there is literally a lot of room for improvement.

Came in to say exactly this. I don't think you could cram all the equipment into a Tracer.
I do think you could greatly enhance the capability of the E-1 if someone decided they needed a few.

 

[orlovsky]

- lift size: too long for the forward lift, would have to shed 2ft. Should fit on the deck edge lift.

On the positive side, the forward lift of the Clems is given as 17m or 17.4m long. From the drawings it is 17.4m, so the E-2B (not the longer C) would just fit with 17.17m. Just ~11cm clearance at the ends, but this could be solved by an innovative high tech solution: