Originally Posted by Foghorn
Clearly, some people weren't listening to Liam Fox's speech the other day when he absolutely slam dunked the Harrier for not having the capability that Tornado does and that was the very reason Harrier was retired from service. Liam Fox categorically stated that the Harrier was, at the time of the SDSR, incapable of holding the HERRICK commitment as well as a no notice Op, which is Libya. Moreover, he said that if we still had a carrier and Harrier, the UK would still have deployed GR4 and Typhoon to GdC.
Liam Fox's words, not mine.
Regards.
Good afternoon Foghorn,
I fear some folks are tending to make incorrect assumptions regarding what our illustrious Government Minister said.
I think we can all accept that different types of aircraft carry different types of ordnance and I suspect our Defence Minister was briefed by his relevant expert before releasing that speech but my question would be,
"So what?"
Is Dr Laim Fox saying the Harrier is not suitable?
Is he saying,
The Harrier could not carry the ordnance required for any close support mission?
Is he saying the Harrier was the only close support aircraft that was available and therefore could not have carried out EVERY task the RAF is required to perform?
I fear it is 'chaff' put out by those that want to avoid this daft situation where we are faced with the stupid situation where a few days ago I watched HMS Illustrious steam by Torbay having just completed a multi million pound refit and CANNOT fulfil her role as an aircraft carrier simply because her cupboard is bare!!!!
NO fixed wing AIRCRAFT.
Is that madness or what? Yes they are available but they are locked away in a garden shed and we cannot have the key!!
Why store them if they are never going to be used?
I am no fan of this type of carrier but if we have it then it just seems perverse not to use it. Having said that I also think it was daft for the RAF to have used the Harrier on their huge concrete motorways!
The Cold War has been dead and buried many, many years ago and when that died the role of a shore based Harrier could probably be claimed to have died with it??
To me the Harrier should have been used in areas where no other type of fixed wing fast jet could operate. ie Those horrible carriers we have\had in our Royal Navy. Where we have huge strips of concrete then use something that could carry more 'Death, Destruction or Deterrent'
Horses for courses and I am baffled as to why this aircraft was used so much by the RAF. Was it the best aircraft for the job, or the only option that was available?