You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Military Aviation

Lockheed S-3 Viking Resurrection?

Your online Air Force Base.
 

miamiair (netAirspace FAA) 22 Apr 14, 12:12Post
Lockheed Wants To Bring The S-3 Viking Back From The Dead

The Navy's choice to retire the S-3 Viking in 2009 was thought of by many as extremely nearsighted and brutally lacking in creativity. Now, a half decade later, Lockheed, the aircraft's original manufacturer, wants to resurrect the Vikings from their collective grave in Arizona, and fly them from America's flattops once again in a crucial role.

While in service, the S-3 represented a voluminous, comparatively long endurance platform that had incredible potential for re-fitting and growth. In an age where an aircraft's avionics and adaptability are the name of the game over raw performance, the S-3 seemed like a perfect canvas for which NAVAIR could paint their creative dreams upon. And even more importantly, the S-3s were already paid for.

Fast forward to today, and the Viking may be largely gone (it still flies with VX-30 for range control duties and NASA has one for testing) but it is not forgotten. In fact, right before its premature retirement, the Viking was just finding a new role in the deserts of Iraq, utilizing the F-14's hand-me-down LITENING targeting pods, and other plug and play sensors, to detect roadside bombs and provide route clearing duties, all with fantastic results.

The fact that the jet could stay up in the air for hours, without needing costly and high demand tanker gas, was a huge incentive for the DoD to keep the once-sub hunter turned lackluster aerial tanker flying for surveillance and attack duties. Seeing as the aircraft also sported an internal weapons bay that was perfectly sized for today's shrinking and super capable precision guided munitions, the S-3 could have been inexpensively turned into a hardcore weapons and surveillance truck, basically doing the same job as an MQ-9 Reaper.

Link to FOXTROT ALPHA blog.
And let's get one thing straight. There's a big difference between a pilot and an aviator. One is a technician; the other is an artist in love with flight. — E. B. Jeppesen
captoveur 22 Apr 14, 12:46Post
I was kind of surprised they didn't stay on if nothing else as a recovery tanker..

Also, long range ASW for a carrier battle group seems like something we still need.
I like my coffee how I like my women: Black, bitter, and preferably fair trade.
halls120 (Plank Owner) 23 Apr 14, 11:41Post
Beaching the S-3 was a stupid idea in the first place, and the idea that the V-22 can better fill the COD role is ridiculous.

Good on Lockheed for this.
At home in the PNW and loving it
 

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

LEFT

RIGHT
CONTENT