HMS Ark Royal Harrier Launch

[MAKO69 186]

I still do not understand why the GB govt grounded them and sold some off to the USMC. You would think they would keep 1 carrier and some Harries on hand, just incase.

 

Edited February 3, 2013 by MAKO69

[Slartibartfast 153]

Oh that makes you and just about everyone else apart from the bean counters... Problem was that the RAF didn't really like the Harrier too much compared to the Tornado GR-4 and they had the choice axe Tornado's or Harriers and as the RN flew the Harriers as well made sense to them to ditch the Harriers to get all the fixed wing flying back to the RAF!!!

 

And before anyone says I am biased I spent 10 years in RAF Blue...

[Nesher 628]

link ain't good..

[+ianh755 196]

Come on now Slarti be fair The Tonka can do more than a Harrier plus the carriers needed to be scrapped due to cost so without carriers the Harrier's only trump card, SVTOL, wasn't worth all the negatives over scrapping the Tonka.

 

As a techie however I much preferred the 5 years I spent on GR7's over my time on GR4's! Sitting in the front seat of a GR4 felt like going back to the 70's with Jags etc but the backseat was very good!

[MAKO69 186]

link ain't good..

 

Try that Nesher, should be good now.

[Nesher 628]

works great, cool video! damn shame they were scrapped :\

[Snailman 517]

Yea sad it is. The only western aircraft which still my favourites are Harriers and Tomcats. Both decomissioned... in favor of high-tech supercrap( Really sad(

[MAKO69 186]

Yea sad it is. The only western aircraft which still my favourites are Harriers and Tomcats. Both decomissioned... in favor of high-tech supercrap( Really sad(

 

Take it easy, the only super crap would be the F-35 which just made it to the USMC a couple months ago, and I think they only got a few of them. That plane is only what 6 years behind the planned delivery date. The RN was waiting on it hoping for the transition to take place before the decom of the Harrier.

[MigBuster 2,884]

Ha - in an 80s video for the F-16 it has the quote "Disproving the adage that high tech doesn't fly" - Im guessing it got a lot of stick back in the 70s as well.

 

 

The F-35B should be called the Super Harrier III - its the holy grail of Harriers - M1.5, stealth, 2 times the range, far superior payload, 100 times easy to fly - for the Harrier its an upgrade beyond dreams.

 

 

Max stores load

F-35B = 15,000 lbs

AV-8B = 4,630 lbs

 

Internal Fuel

F-35B = 2,014 US Gal

AV-8B = 1,141 US Gal

 

Max Combat Speed

F-35B = M1.5

AV-8B = M0.8

Edited February 7, 2013 by MigBuster

[JediMaster 451]

Yes, and far easier to land vertically than the Harrier ever could be. It's the USMC's dream come true. Whether this program really should've tried to be everything for 3 different services is another argument, but once they get the kinks worked out (and how long did it take for the Harrier?) it will be awesome for them.

[Atreides 144]

Yes JM but one wouldve hoped that since the US was not going at it alone ie several tier 1 partners the programme would not be as behind schedule as it is and with excessive cost overruns not to mention revised performance specs which is an other bull way of saying lowered which is what they really are.

[JediMaster 451]

Well TBH that whole "partner" thing was a bad idea. I can see what it was on two levels. First, it was a way to try and ensure exports by getting customers in at the design stage and making sure their needs would be met to one extent or another. Sound idea, but when the US investment is still over 90% of the total, how could it really affect that much? If the US was at 50% or so of the total, I think it would've worked far better.

Second, and this is the sneaky part, they did it to try and reduce the likelihood of cancellation. After all, the US dumps JSF and look at all these countries that we'd have to refund money to! Not to mention the whole "it makes the US look bad" aspect. Couple that with the fact that there's NOTHING else in development, and it means if JSF goes the best scenario is a handful of upgraded F-15/16/18 sales that will end by 2020 at best while everyone else buys next gen fighters from other countries.

In the end, we've spent non-recoverable money in the tens of billions. If the program is cancelled, not only is that money gone for no results (other than some lessons in R&D that could've been bought far cheaper) but now we have to start yet ANOTHER program (or programs if they decide not to go all-eggs-in-one-basket again) that will easily cost tens of billions before we could get a fighter into production. The chances that program will go any better than this one? I'd say 3720 to 1, the same as successfully navigating an asteroid field.

 

Technology has advanced. Engineering has advanced. Computers have advanced. Management, oversight, and regulations have REGRESSED.

Edited February 8, 2013 by JediMaster

[fallenphoenix1986 603]

Not so much managment regressing as much as the engineers no longer calling the shots, some buisiness/finance major/politician with no idea what he's doing or understanding of what the project is trying to achieve now calls the shots.

 

Craig < disgruntled Mechanical Engineer......

[+Gepard 11,295]

Okay, the Sea Harrier and all other Harriers were excellent planes at their time. But to be honest, they are outdated. Oldtimers.

Would you like to drive a 30 years old car?

[JediMaster 451]

They also have short range and limited payload capacity. They were great tech for their day, but frankly should've been replaced in the 90s with newer tech.