Read the forum code of contact
By: - 29th May 2013 at 01:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That a GR.1 in the last photo?
Here's my contribution...an FA.2 with AIM-9's. (On a side note, I always wished they had somehow utilized the dual AIM-9 rails for an AIM-9/AIM-120 combo thus allowing both missile types and the 30-mm guns to be fitted.)
By: - 29th May 2013 at 02:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Italian AV-8B+
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217072[/ATTACH]
By: - 29th May 2013 at 02:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Indeed it is a GR1. One of my favourite variants I might add.
The Sidewinder/AMRAAM rails were looked at for FA2 but sadly that's as far as things got. Again, Politicians sticking their noses in... so it had to make do with a two Sidewinders on the outer stations, two AMRAAMs under the fuselage with no guns configuration, or two AMRAAMs, two guns and no Sidewinders configuration or the weapons load in the image above. The FA2 had great potential, excellent record during training sorties, and for a few years was considered the best A/A fighter in Europe. But it was the wrong airframe. The RN/FAA should have went the same route the RAF did rather than just upgrade FRS-1 to FA2 standard. Ah well, what could have been...
Warton Harrier with 2,000lb Paveway IIIs and Paveway IV & Sidewinders.
Very impressive!
By: - 29th May 2013 at 19:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
By: - 30th May 2013 at 21:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Harrier FRS-1 dropping a WE.177A.
By: - 30th May 2013 at 23:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That a GR.1 in the last photo?Here's my contribution...an FA.2 with AIM-9's. (On a side note, I always wished they had somehow utilized the dual AIM-9 rails for an AIM-9/AIM-120 combo thus allowing both missile types and the 30-mm guns to be fitted.)
Originally wingtip Sidewinder rails were planned, that would have done the trick, really wish that had been produced :(
By: - 31st May 2013 at 02:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well, cant have a sea harrier thread without a pic of an IN harrier. :P
Couldnt find any pics with a fully equipped IN harrier.
Does the IN harrier only have two wing hardpoints (on each wing)?
By: - 31st May 2013 at 02:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes. They're old, or Ex, FAA FRS-1s. Some of those might have seen action in The Falklands and Bosnia actually. The FRS-1s were based on the RAF's GR1s which had the same configuration regarding stations. It boggles one's mind why the Royal Navy didn't go with the Harrier II (GR5) rather than upgrading the FRS-1 to FA2. More stations, four per wing, and there would have been room for the very capable Blue Vixen radar... Shame. But like everything, comes down to costs and a stingy Government.Does the IN harrier only have two wing hardpoints (on each wing)?
By: - 31st May 2013 at 05:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Very impressive!
Very impressive indeed. That looks even more comical than a Viper with rammers on the wingtip rails and 2000 lb bombs on the wing stations. Cool!
By: - 1st June 2013 at 02:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here's a good one of an Italian bird. I think the AV-8B looks good with the AIM-120 and AIM-9 combo plus that radar nose. It makes me wonder how they fare in air defense exercises given that both Spain and Italy use them in this role.....or so I assume.
Seems like not a bad little fighter even though its not supersonic.
By: - 1st June 2013 at 06:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here's a good one of an Italian bird. I think the AV-8B looks good with the AIM-120 and AIM-9 combo plus that radar nose. It makes me wonder how they fare in air defense exercises given that both Spain and Italy use them in this role.....or so I assume.
Seems like not a bad little fighter even though its not supersonic.
The impression I have gotten from talking to UK Harrier types, is that it was not especially capable BVR. Their "fighter" role was very defensive in nature.
By: - 1st June 2013 at 07:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The impression I have gotten from talking to UK Harrier types, is that it was not especially capable BVR. Their "fighter" role was very defensive in nature.
This might be a stupid question, but were they by any chance able to use their nozzles to vector thrust to increase turn rate in given situations? In any case I guess it might affect relative wind, AoA and load factor a little bit.
By: - 1st June 2013 at 14:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This might be a stupid question, but were they by any chance able to use their nozzles to vector thrust to increase turn rate in given situations? In any case I guess it might affect relative wind, AoA and load factor a little bit.
It was said that it was used in the Argentine war...known as VIFFING
Vectoring nozzles can also be used for Vectoring In Forward Flight or "viffing", e.g. a rapid braking allowing a chasing fighter jet to overtake thus bringing itself into the range of forward firing weapons. Viffing was used to great effect during the Anglo-Argentinian Falklands War, where 28 Royal Navy and 6 RAF jets did not incur any losses in dogfighting against a force of more than 200 Argentine Air Force jets. The Harrier Jump Jets in question were subsequently referred to as 'The Black Death' by the Argentinian pilots. Viffing also allowed a much tighter turn in combat manoeuvres, although there is little evidence to suggest that it was regularly taught to pilots, as the loss of airspeed could make the aircraft vulnerable to attack.
By: - 1st June 2013 at 14:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It was said that it was used in the Argentine war...known as VIFFING
And it's said that there has been no actual record of the Harrier ever using VIFFing during the Argentine war, it's fiction?
By: - 1st June 2013 at 16:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I've heard historical accounts of early AV-8A guys using VIFF'ing in training/DACT. I can't really remember the context, but I believe it was during the initial operational evaluation of the type. My guess is that it is something that Harrier folks are familiar with.
By: - 4th June 2013 at 09:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The impression I have gotten from talking to UK Harrier types, is that it was not especially capable BVR. Their "fighter" role was very defensive in nature.I think it would depend on which British pilots, FAA or RAF. Lieutenant Nick Richardson RN and most certainly the very experienced Commander Henry Mitchell RN would have considered the FA2 a very capable BVR Interceptor and Fighter, for quite a time it was also considered by many others to be highly effective, some even regarded it to being the best BVR Fighter in Europe for a time also. Commander Ade Orchard RN was another Harrier pilot that held the FA2's BVR capabilities in high regard too.
By: - 4th June 2013 at 10:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I've heard historical accounts of early AV-8A guys using VIFF'ing in training/DACT. I can't really remember the context, but I believe it was during the initial operational evaluation of the type. My guess is that it is something that Harrier folks are familiar with.
As far as I know, there was one issue with that. Once you had performed such a maneuver, you didn't have much energy left, so, you were a sitting duck.
By: - 4th June 2013 at 12:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As far as I know, there was one issue with that. Once you had performed such a maneuver, you didn't have much energy left, so, you were a sitting duck.Which is why Viffing was never used during The Falklands War. It was a strong, typical case of 'where there's an advantage there's a disadvantage.' Sure enough it was practiced during training exercises, sometimes, quite rare actually, but overall it was decided it wasn't needed. What a lot of people didn't realise is that the Harrier had/has great subsonic acceleration for an aircraft without reheat, and although it didn't have the tightest turning circle of the likes of the Mirage, F-16, F-5 & what have you it still had a few surprises up it's sleeve.
By: - 4th June 2013 at 18:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes. They're old, or Ex, FAA FRS-1s. Some of those might have seen action in The Falklands and Bosnia actually. The FRS-1s were based on the RAF's GR1s which had the same configuration regarding stations. It boggles one's mind why the Royal Navy didn't go with the Harrier II (GR5) rather than upgrading the FRS-1 to FA2. More stations, four per wing, and there would have been room for the very capable Blue Vixen radar... Shame. But like everything, comes down to costs and a stingy Government.
Not true. Whilst the IN's FRS51s were based on the RN's FRS1s, they were all new build for the Indian Navy. All surviving RN FRS1s (ie those not crashed or otherwise lost) were upgraded to FA2 standard in the 90s along with a batch of new builds. The only Harriers sold second hand to the IN were a pair of ex RN T4Ns in the early 2000s. The only real difference between the FRS1 and the FRS51 was that the latter were fitted to fire the Magic AAM instead of the Sidewinder. The only survivng FRS1 (at the FAA Museum) is in fact a hybrid, using the nose of a Shar shot down over the Adriatic and the fuselage/wings etc of a GR3.
By: - 4th June 2013 at 21:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This one?
http://www.fleetairarm.com/exhibit/British-Aerospace-Sea-Harrier-FRS1/4-6-43.aspx
Posts: 2,631
By: EELightning - 28th May 2013 at 23:56
Inspired by PhantomII's Amazing Weapons Loads - Tornado thread, I'd thought I'd make one for the Harrier. Very nice images, pleasant discussions.
Enjoy!