Harrier supersonic?

It's when people mistakenly describe them as being part of the Army they get annoyed.

Click to expand...

US Marines also hate to be identifed as soliders. They are Marines. Their basic training is 12 weeks..then all Marines are sent to Infantry Training battalion for 11 weeks. After that they are sent to there technical schools. They consider the army much as the RM's do....Good for a parade and occupation.

Your assesment of a Navalized Typhoon is 100% correct. It has no real sea legs. You just can't put an arresting hook on an aircraft and say it's ready for sea duty. That sort of duty requires a speicalized air frame that can take the pounding of arrested landings.

bd popeye said:

Your assesment of a Navalized Typhoon is 100% correct. It has no real sea legs. You just can't put an arresting hook on an aircraft and say it's ready for sea duty. That sort of duty requires a speicalized air frame that can take the pounding of arrested landings.

Click to expand...

I remember reading a long time ago that the kinetic energy absorbed by an aircraft's landing gear when it hits the deck of a carrier is the same as that needed to boot a one ton elephant one mile vertically in the air. I'm sure we'd all pay good money to see that experiment:rofl: but seriously, one has to bear in mind landing on a moving deck at sea is a world away from a leisurely landing on a 3 mile long runway. A catapult launch is likewise no picnic, accelerating a 20 ton aircraft from 0 to 130+knots in 200ft and 2 seconds would rip a normal land based plane to pieces. Typhoon is a great plane, but by naval standard it's made of tissue paper. The Harrier family got round these problems by learning to stop, then land, and to take off by going over a hump backed bridge (and not coming down the other side).

adeptitus said:

As a last resort, they could buy Rafale M from France, or spend $ to develop the BAE-Saab JAS-39 Gripen for carrier operations.

Click to expand...

Rafale was really another threat that John Reid discussed with the French to put pressure on the Americans. Gripen was another "possibility", but that was even less likely than Rafale.

At the end of the day, the bluff worked and we got the deal over JSF. The RN always wanted F-35s for the Queen Elizabeth class, so unless the project somehow crash and burns that is what they will order.

adeptitus is right in that Harrier will always remain a source of pride for the UK. As to why we didn't want to simply be the US' customer, there's been growing concern (whether founded or not) that we're too dependent on the US as it is in regards to arms. It was a good idea to get the tech agreement I think.

Well if the Brits decide on the Rafale, they will have to get new carriers because their carriers dont have arresting cables. I know it may seem that the Yanks are a bit shy about selling the F35 to other countries in its true form, but its only because its more advanced then the F22, it doesnt even have a HUD. Its built into your Helmet. The advancements in the F35 will then be added to the later blocks of the F-22 Its like big brother and little brother. Big brither stronger but little brother smarter. The same companies have collaberated in the design of both fighters.

If you ever heard of a Craig (sp) super computer, there's the equal of 3 in the F22 and F35, with the room for add ons. There are countries in the world buying time to be able to access these computers in American Universities, and theres the equall of 3 on one aircraft.
If you want the best. You got to give up bucks.

DennisDaMenace said:

Well if the Brits decide on the Rafale, they will have to get new carriers because their carriers dont have arresting cables.

Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to the Invincible class not having Arresting gear? Well they are too small to operate CTOL aircraft anyway. Reconstructing them as part of a SLEP (service life extension program) was considered and part of the proposals included cutting the ships in two in order to insert a new hull section to make them longer, thus increasing hangar capacity, but was rejected due to the high cost and limited results that would be achieved (only four more aircraft could be carried) and the fact that it would delay replacing the ships until they were sixty years old. The CVF project was always going to be the more cost effective and flexible option, and they are going to be fitted for but not with catapults and arresting gear so that retro fitting them at a later date (or even before completion) will not be difficult or expensive.
I believe that when the Invincibles leave service with the RN, other navies will buy them as they will still be very modern command and control ships and second hand will be a lot cheaper than buying a new carrier. India tops the list of potential customers, but it will be interesting to see who else joins the queue. Chile for example has a long history of buying ex RN ships, has a large area of the South Pacific to patrol and a long history of rivalry with the other major South American navies. Perhaps Pakistan might decide to upgrade it's navy to one that can actually stand against India's (without a carrier it can never win a sea war). The Invincibles are too good to waste, but then so is the Sea Harrier.

bd popeye said:

Your assesment of a Navalized Typhoon is 100% correct. It has no real sea legs. You just can't put an arresting hook on an aircraft and say it's ready for sea duty. That sort of duty requires a speicalized air frame that can take the pounding of arrested landings.

Click to expand...

Just a little note before anyone points this out, most western land based combat aircraft built in the last forty years actually already have arresting hooks for use with runway RHAG systems (Rotary Hydraulic Arresting Gear). In the fifties when early jets were in service most of them were fitted with braking parachutes as they would otherwise need VERY long runways to slow down after landing. Naval aircraft used Arrestor gear fitted to their runways for dummy deck practice as the aircaft already had hooks and fitting a parachute was superfluous. In the sixties, the USAF along with several foreign airfoces began to adopt Naval aircraft as their standard combat equipment (eg F-4 Phantom, A-7 Corsair, A-1 Skyraider, A-3 Skywarrior which became the B-66 Destroyer, in Britain it was the F-4 and the Blackburn Buccaneer S2) due to their superiority over contemporary land based aircraft and it made sense to adopt arrestor gear for runways as well since all these types were designed to use it anyway. when the next generation of land based combat aircraft came along in the seventies (F-15 Eagle, F-16, Tornado MRCA etc) all their prospective airbases were already fitted with RHAG so adding hooks to the airframes was a logical step. Typhoon, Gripen, Rafale (land based variants) all have, to the best of my knowledge, arrestor hooks fitted for use with land based RHAG, but none of them are designed to withstand the shock of a deck landing.

Oh by the way, this is what a supersonic Harrier would have looked like...

Sadly it wasn't to be.

hmm i like the shape and the intake of the original harrier than the prototype of supersonic harrier. Just a question, how old is the harriers engine design???

The Bristol (later Rolls Royce) Pegasus engine started development as long ago as 1957 and made its' first appearance in the Hawker P1127 technology demonstrator in 1960. Since then it has been uprated and improved so much that whilst it still has the same configuration, the performance has changed immensely. The first pegasus engine was rated at 11,300lbs thrust, whereas modern examples as fitted to AV-8Bs produce twice as much power, and the engine intended for the P1154 supersonic Harrier was rated at 33,000lbs thrust with Plenum Chamber Burning (hot exhaust from the front nozzles as well as the rear).

The project fell apart because they were really trying to design two completely different Aircraft, the P1154RN was a two seat high altitude supersonic interceptor while the P1154RAF was a single seat low altitude strike aircraft with terrain following radar. First the Navy pulled out in 1964 and ordered the F-4K Phantom instead, then the project was cancelled by the Labour Government who were out to destroy the British Aviation Industry. The RAF was given the consolation prize of a 'developed' P1127RAF, which inherited the name allocated to the P1154, Harrier.

Obi Wan
Yea, I remember that. The RF4-C had a hook. I never botherd to think about it. Or why durring emergency landings it was always throottle to idle, hook down and shoot deployed. I was always thinking, what the heck is the hook going to do except knotch some concrete. I always thought of it catching between two slabs of concrete and comming to the most abrubt halt. LOL