PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Decision to axe Harrier is "bonkers".
View Single Post
Old 18th Apr 2011, 10:08
  #629 (permalink)  
Finningley Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 63
Posts: 1,854
Received 77 Likes on 43 Posts
Double Zero, you've just entered the fray which you've criticised in the same post. If the GR9 is a precision strike aircraft, just what is the GR4? A Search and Rescue launch!?

For the umpteenth time, in case you've missed previous posts, nobody here in the for, or against camp, was happy to see the Harrier go, but something had to go, for purely financial reasons ok. That means the R.A.F. who's assets were concerned and who had to get rid of one of three FJ types, had to decide.

So to analyze dispassionately; The Typhoon, brand new, still to reach full all round development as both an air to air fighter and an air to ground attack aircraft and performance wise, I don't care what the Sharkeys and the Tabloids of this world have to say, the Typhoon loops and rolls rings galore around any Harrier. Its still being delivered, I don't think the air staff were keen to get rid of that somehow.

With the GR4, its more of a numbers game and sustainability. They have 136 of them to some 45 to 65 Harriers, a rough estimate I know, but depending on which source you read, the quote is always different. The Harrier has a lesser range and payload. A matter of fact. Its not as fast, would you care to know. And if the air staff decided to retain it over the GR4, the Navy would have half of them. This would be rather like the Army reducing from 36 to 6 Infantry Battalions and using 6 of them to replace the Royal Marines. The Army are the principal land force, the R.A.F. are.... well believe it or not, the principal air force!

The R.A.F. has had to put up with attempts from the other two services to have its assets subsumed for decades!

The Carriers would, all are agreed have been a nice edge, but not the principal means of delivering an air offensive ability. The cost of running the carriers would actually out strip the current deployment, because to be as effective as is claimed, there'd need to be more than one at sea at any one time, and not just with close air support Harriers either. If we can get that in addition, great. As it is, I'll bet you Tornados and Typhoons will be on the spot far sooner than the Ark or Illustrious can steam into range. They fly around the world a lot quicker. The carriers would come into their own if we were going to bomb the Marianas!

FB
Finningley Boy is offline