The reps were more than happy to get input from anyone they could, and talk about the gear we'd be getting. Also, the locations of the stores dispensers were laid out, as were the locations of observer seats, galley, etc.
Only thing they still weren't sure of was the bomb bay. Apparently, they still had some structural things to noodle out before they could build one into a 737 airframe.
They want to make a clean leap of technology with the RADAR, sensors, and Acoustic gear, instead of just tinkering with the old stuff like before. I fully agree with that.
We've learned a lot about military birds in the past half-century. Previously, they were thought to only last a few years before replacement; after all, that's what happened with the B-17's, 29's, and others, right? Problem was, money got tighter and tighter, and we began stretching that life out to decades, to the point where it just couldn't be stretched further. Now, since we know that's the way it is now, I'm sure that we're building them to that standard, vs. the old.
An interesting question...if we had simply replaced the P-3 and other old birds when originally intended, after about a decade or so, and continued to advance at that pace, instead of patching them together for 40 years with spit and bailin' wire and then spending major $$$ for brand-new aircraft, would it have cost MORE or LESS than the way we actually did it?
Rockpile, I just did a quick bit of net research for curiosity.
A Lockheed Electra weighed in at 117K lbs. A 737-800 (close to the MMA) has a GTOW of 172K lbs (http://www.b737.org.uk/history.htm#737-900).
The static thrust of the 737 engines are up to 24K lbs per side, 48K lbs total. A T-56 is somewhere around 4000 shp. Figure about 80% of that gets through the prop and installation..and with 4 of them a p-3 probably puts out about 13,000 thrust hp. Converting hp to thrust is a bit weird, but if you assume 300 mph at sealevel at full tilt (and that is a guess)..a P-3 would need about 16000 thrust.
So, T/W ratios are .33 for the 737 and about .14 for the P-3/Electra. NOW, the important thing here is rate of climb which is proportional to both T/W and L/D..so you can multiply those two to come up with a direct comparison (without actually calculating ft/min ROC)
A P-3 would be lucky to pull an L/D of 15, and a 737 should easily peg 18. So our generic climb parameter ends up being 5.94 for the 737, and 2.06 for the P-3. Basically the 737 only needs .33% thrust to match the P-3 ROC.
From this, it wouldn't be surprising that the 737 would outperform the P-3 in a micro burst situation. It is good question, and needs to be verified
And I could be wrong, however, it seems this purchase may not have been aerospace welfare.