I sometimes wonder if we would still have Spitfires in the RAF if some folk had their way. The Harrier is over 40 years old and is well past it's sell by date, a case of time to move on. It was going in a few years anyway time anyway so I don't see what the big deal is. I honestly can't say I'm sad to see and hopefully the UK won't get itself in a position where it regrets the decision-Personally I don't think we will. 1982 was a long time ago. I can't say I'm sad to see it go from a financial point of view and maybe a bit from a nostaligic point of view but in short I'd rather see the money be spent somewhere else in the country where it's more needed. When all is said and done the UK has no money and tough decisions have to be made. Incoming! My point is that we have,it would appear, to have abandoned the concept of vertical lift off and carrier based aircraft for at least 10 years.There is no doubt that the Harrier can be further developed.The present Marks are well removed from the prototype that first flew nearly 50 years ago. If you want an example of how the Harrier concept has been developed then look at the development types which have recently entered service with the US Marine Corps.Further,to await the F35 without successional experience of carrier operations is a folly.There will be a considerable time allocated to manufacturers and similator training. Additionally there is no reason why European military aircraft designers could not have developed our own carrier aircraft but the problem appears that we dwell too much on the problem of over budget and overrun issues. As an aside, it would appear that the F22 Raptor's role is now been relegated and it not the aircraft that it was claimed to be since it was trialled against the Typhoon.Things could therefore be worse, we could have had the F 22 thrust on to us. Nostalgia must not interfere with clear,rational thinking.I remember meeting one of our Master Gunners (a veteran of nearly two wartime tours) at a RAF reunion a couple of years ago.I happened to mention to him that the squadron had been disbanded as a front line piston job squadron as the Valiants were about to enter service.We had a laugh when "Chiefy XXXXX" went straight to the point and blamed those sods at the Air Ministry for change. Older RAF pilots from the formation of the RAF, must have thought the same when they were forced to convert to the Hurricane when Fighter Command received this new wonder aircraft in 1936. Finally do not think the government defence pundits know all the answers.There is still time for a review and there appears to be pressure from the defence rational thinkers.You will find if there is the likelihood of a demanding interview over government decisions,the government spokesmen are not all that confident.One thing I have noticed with this crowd is that if an interview would be is likely to be embarassing,there is an anouncement that the given department has no one available to make comment.Eventually the question is answered through the government PR machine. I notice that there is a change in decision making over the presence of the RAF in Scotland.Kinloss will go as before but Lossiemouth will remain open instead of closing.Another victim has been found and that will be Leuchers.Its not that long ago that we were being informed of the Russian presence in our Scottish air space was now again present and the danger it represented.Our government responds by reducing the RAF presence in Scotland to one airfield. I'm afraid that it appears we have some real Charlies in charge of defence decisions.
Again I agree with Harry's comments - also there is the fact that old technology is better for certain tasks than the most modern -hi-tech gear the Forces love to buy, in counter insurgency and limited war prop driven aircraft have a much longer loiter time over target to assist ground forces - a good example of this would be the use of Sky Raiders during the Vietnam war in terms of load carried and loiter time - very reassuring to know you have air cover on call for hours instead of minutes! In Rhodesia the Cessna 337 Skymaster was used as a ground attack and recon aircraft to very good effect.
Something to remember....with the end of the Cold War we lost the battlefield the Harrier was REALLY designed for it's shipboard use is only a compromise.... My point is that we have,it would appear, to have abandoned the concept of vertical lift off and carrier based aircraft for at least 10 years. ...given that everyone else in the world with carriers seems to do quite well with full-sized, through-deck flattops and conventional aircraft! WE used the Harriers' capability to build a number of "pocket carriers" that are really only "commando carriers" like the USMC's ones - in a straight-up confrontation with First World fixed-wing aircraft flying from land airfields, or even a decent through-deck Carrier Air Group....the Harriers would have come off worst What we SHOULD now be doing is looking VERY intently as a carrier-capable Typhoon....for that option has great potential for sales to nations still operating through-deck carriers! Not everyone wants to buy American... Oh - and if it's not too late revisit those two new carriers we are/are not supposed to be getting some time (what's happening to them seems to vary by the week, depending on the direction of the wind or the quarter of the Moon! ) and turn them into REAL carriers to fly a navalised Typhoon from!
A picture of the last Harrier flypast over the Houses of Parliament. You have squint a bit to see what the 'boys' are trying to say!
A picture of the last Harrier flypast over the Houses of Parliament. You have squint a bit to see what the 'boys' are trying to say! View attachment 44385 Thats photo shopped ! The RAF never had that many Harriers :p
Idler, Perhaps they will disband the Bns in Afghanistan, as they did with the Scottish Regts in Canada, now that would save a few bob in transportation and accommodation costs back in Blighty!!!!!!!!
This is just another case of the Diabolical Disorientation which appears to be sweeping the world - so hang on to your sanity as it will probably get much worse ...I note that even placid Switzerland is proposing a referendum on whether to allow adult(sic) incest...and why not - that will just leave bestiality and nacrophilia to think about...only my view mind you.... Cheers You may be flogging a dead horse there Tom: you forgot sadism
Found this link on ARRSE: Government ready for a U-turn over scrapped Harriers - East Hampshire - The News
In the 60s before joining the army I did a mechanical engineering apprenticeship (5.1/2) years then, worked on Harriers and the Naval version, RAF used a lot of magnesium Naval did not! My bet is that there will be an announcement - the usual political bull, where we will be told that the remaining airframes will be updated and flogged off to the Indian Naval Service who will have 4 carriers in service.
I have a friend who is an old time VW mechanic. He told us as a Volunteer Fireman they always carried sand to put the engine fires out in the early VWs being sold in the US. The early VWs had magnesium in their engine blocks. It was almost impossible to put out a fire in a engine compartment fire because of the magnesium. Only by smothering the fire with plenty of sand did they get the fire to stop burning. Would the magnesium with its' extreme burning temperatures been an issue with a Harrier fire, especially in combat events.
One point that I've not seen mentioned very much, if at all, in the debate over the scrapping of the Harriers, is that the RN has not had any genuine carrier borne interceptors since 2006. The Sea Harriers were then taken out of service, leaving the Fleet Air Arm with only the GR9 ground attack variant. It could carry Sidewinder AAMs, but did not have the right type of radar to be an effective interceptor.
Hmm, I may be wrong but I think magnesium ceased to be used in military jets and others in the 50s... For the Harrier say miscellaneous steel and aluminium alloys and composites, like carbon fibre, boron, kevlar, etc.
Magnesium was used in the alloys for the Avon engines.One important point about magnesium is that once it fires,it is very difficult for the fire to be extinguished.The recommended response is to exclude oxygen by using sand as a oxygen barrier. Sea Harriers,I believe these were transferred to the RAF at Cottesmore.My sister's grandaughter's husband was a naval flight mechanic,posted to Cottesmore and then continued to service them on two tours in Afghanistan.
Harry Ree - yes, there were also components like control cable drums made from magnesium - not in navalized airframes, magnesium corrodes (crystallizes) easily touch a finished component and your prints will be shown like photo negatives! As apprentices we would pile up mag swarf and set light to it, then apply the hose - wow, that got it going! It is not so easy to get magnesium in component form to burn.
Would the magnesium with its' extreme burning temperatures been an issue with a Harrier fire, especially in combat events. Magnesium does not burn well in bulk. If a harrier is on fire, the fuel and weapons would probably be more of a problem. Titanium is another metal commonly used in aircraft.
I want to thank you all for clearing me up on the magnesium issue. My father is gone now but he worked in Sheet Metals for years. They made Heat Exchangers for the Middle East years ago using all copper. Then the company went to Aluminum to save money and other things. He used to talk about the Aluminum welders at his work, he said how skilled they were because it took more skill then welding some of the other older metals. I was dating my future wife at the time. Her mother had a favorite Aluminum pot that broke. I gave to my father and one of the welders fixed it up better then new. From then on I was solid with my future mother in law.
Clegg: We're Going Back to Basics Regarding National Defense! In a financial and military defense accommodation arrived at after intense internal debate, the Coalition has announced it will go ahead with the construction of two new aircraft carriers, but that they will be stocked with WWII fighter planes to keep costs 'manageable.' The HMS Queen Elizabeth, scheduled for delivery in 2015, and the HMS Prince of Wales, scheduled for 2018, got the 'green light' after a decision was reached to scrap further production of the famous Harrier GR7 'Jump Jets', and the cost cutting of Catapults on the ships to launch new 'fast movers' which have been deemed 'redundant.' According to Nick Clegg, outspoken advocate of world peace and appeasement, "the savings will be enough to enable us to proceed with the new ships." "By bringing the Hurricanes and Spitfires out of retirement, and having them refurbished, we can eliminate the costly catapults, and even remove one of the turbine engines from the ships as it has been proven the piston propelled planes can launch themselves easily into an 8 knot wind." With each ship scheduled to carry 50 attack planes, Clegg said by scouring old war museums, barns in Wales, and the Isle of Wight WWII theme park, the military can easily come up with 'at least 124 remnants of WWII, and enough parts to keep them running!" Clegg said there were many more cost savings to be realized with the decision. "First off, we don't need high priced officers to fly the things. In the Great War they put enlisted men in the cockpits...cheaper salaries, lower overhead, and God knows, much more expendable...no sense wasting our 'best & brightest' when they're need here at home to help direct the country!" "Secondly, Technology has come a long way. We can go to Costco and buy a perfectly good GPS for about $125 to replace all that costly junk in those noisy jets not to mention we have plenty of .303 ammo hanging around in warehouses in Ireland just waiting to be put to good use....this is a 'win-win' for the country as we fight our way out of this economic mess created by that Scottish Bloke.....!" According to a spokesman for eBay, there has been a rash of requests from the civilian UK population requesting information on purchasing used Flak Balloons to signal their support of the cost cutting measures.
