
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
GORSHKOV |
GRUMMAN E-2A & E-2B: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEIR AVIONICS |
Lead | |
|
Registered Member
Posts: 1 (23-Apr-2008 21:24:29) |
Hello, I am an aviation researcher from Brazil with some articles already published (one of them can see here: http://www.laahs.com/artman/publish/article_220.shtml). Currently I am working on a book about all
AEW/AWACS platforms ever built. This way, I am requesting information on the differences between the avionics suites aboard the Grumman E-2A & E-2B
aircraft. Not their performance data (except those related to radars, which will welcome), it is enough to obtain their designations. I will be very pleased to
give full credits for any colaboration. Wether possible, duplicated NATOPS or Flight Manuals pages will be welcome, and can be sent to the following email:
tochkaopori@yahoo.com.br. THANKS IN ADVANCE!!!
![]()
|
||
Nightwatch2 |
|||
|
Posts: 3512 (23-Apr-2008 21:42:35) |
The difference is in the computer suite.
Republican; because not everyone can be on welfare.
|
||
taschoene |
|||
|
Posts: 4200 (23-Apr-2008 23:04:20) |
There's a good basic history at Greg Goebel's excelent Air Vectors website:
http://www.vectorsite.net/ave2c.html As Nightwatch says, the principal difference between the A and B was the replacement of the rotary drum computers with Litton L-304 digital computers. Ther E-2A/B NATOPS can be purchased online: http://www.eflightmanuals.com/detail/itemList.asp?cID=7 |
||
GORSHKOV |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 2 (23-Apr-2008 23:22:30) |
It would not be possible someone redirect me to any downloadable manual or NATOPS, or, simply, tell me the information I have requested? Only designationsm
references, not performance data...THANKS FOR THE ATTENTION EVERYONE PAID..
|
||
taschoene |
|||
|
Posts: 4201 (23-Apr-2008 23:29:27) |
You've been given sources--do you want us to do your research for you too?
|
||
Nightwatch2 |
|||
|
Posts: 3514 (24-Apr-2008 00:38:43) |
GORSHKOV wrote: No gorshkov, you've already been provided the open sources. You will have to do the espionage on your own.
Republican; because not everyone can be on welfare.
|
||
GORSHKOV |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 3 (24-Apr-2008 01:55:36) |
taschoene wrote: WHAT A BAD EDUCATION'S ATTACK!!!! MY BOOK IS NOT BEING FROM
INTERNET SOURCES, WEBSITES, FOR EXAMPLE...THIS EVERYONE CAN DO, EVEN YOU...
|
||
wabpilot |
|||
|
Posts: 2022 (24-Apr-2008 03:39:14) |
GORSHKOV wrote: You asked for a downloadable version of the NATOPS manual. Where, other than a the internet would you find such a download? As you have already been told, the open sources have been provided, do your own espionage. |
||
cv43coralsea |
|||
|
Posts: 52 (24-Apr-2008 19:27:44) |
....BOOK IS NOT BEING FROM INTERNET SOURCES, WEBSITES, FOR EXAMPLE...THIS EVERYONE CAN DO, EVEN YOU...WTFO? Are you trying to seem more credible by siting obscure sources? There are a lot of amazing transcripts, stories, excerpts, related research, oh and NATOPS Manuals, all published on the internet that could save you countless hours of research and give you valuable information you'd never find elsewhere. It won't make your article any less credible if you have good sources sited that include websites. I just don't get your point unless.......nahhh? BTW, What is the bloody difference if someone emails you scanned pages from the NATOPS manual vs. you downloading it???? |
||
Nightwatch2 |
|||
|
Posts: 3515 (24-Apr-2008 22:19:25) |
the difference is that Boris here is trying to dupe some well-meaning but ignorant patsy into emailing him something, anything, to his FSB (former KGB) computer. At that point, he's got him and his target is on the road to espionage and a long-term housing lease at Leavenworth. very obvious ploy.
Republican; because not everyone can be on welfare.
|
||
emc |
|||
|
Posts: 3701 (24-Apr-2008 22:53:21) |
Nah; the KGB guys hung around bars near naval bases and manufacturers. I remember meeting Dan Graham about 30 years back; his comment was that AvWeek was
worth about a billion a year to the Soviets, more from the ads than the editorial content. And, of course, chummed with $20s. Hey, it worked with the
Walkers.
|
||