Harriers go on to 2030
Well, my only Harrier experience is crashing the sim 
and I'll be interested to read what the ex Harrier sqn people have to say.
It appeared to me to be a most versatile aircraft and, if equipped with modern weapons, very effective.
Bit expensive to maintain but, then, aren't they all?
and I'll be interested to read what the ex Harrier sqn people have to say.It appeared to me to be a most versatile aircraft and, if equipped with modern weapons, very effective.
Bit expensive to maintain but, then, aren't they all?
Originally Posted by Basil
if equipped with modern weapons
Did the article say how they can justify this with supposed replacement the F-35B coming on line? Surely that can't fund both? Or is this insurance if the B does not survive? I think it was very savvy of the USMC to buy up the Gr7/9 fleet at the fire sale price, and concur not so smart for the UK to get out of the VSTOL game so quickly- at least until B is proven.
The article states the reasoning being delays in the F-35B program and a realization that the AV-8Bs have a lot more life in them than the USMC F/A-18A-Ds.
US Marine Corps studying Harrier enhancements
IMO the USMC F-35B buy was pretty much due to be a one-for-one replacement for F/A-18A/B + AV-8B. Running on the AV-8B longer gives the USMC an option to wait and see what force mix the USN decides upon as the X-47B UCAV Demonstrator trials progress (which seem to be going remarkably well in a relatively short space of time).
The USMC started considering running the AV-8B on to 2030 about a year ago when it realized that a new fatigue monitoring system would give more accurate data than the original model.
USMC hopes new method for tracking fatigue life will help extend Harrier to 2030
US Marine Corps studying Harrier enhancements
IMO the USMC F-35B buy was pretty much due to be a one-for-one replacement for F/A-18A/B + AV-8B. Running on the AV-8B longer gives the USMC an option to wait and see what force mix the USN decides upon as the X-47B UCAV Demonstrator trials progress (which seem to be going remarkably well in a relatively short space of time).
The USMC started considering running the AV-8B on to 2030 about a year ago when it realized that a new fatigue monitoring system would give more accurate data than the original model.
USMC hopes new method for tracking fatigue life will help extend Harrier to 2030
Last edited by RAFEngO74to09; 29th May 2013 at 18:38.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
With the carriers committed to being built without cats, if the B model gets ****canned, then the RN est dans le merde.
New build Harriers anyone? Can BAE even make any more? Or did they quite sensibly destroy the jigs etc so they'd have to build new ones at even more cost?
Or maybe a U-U-turn on EMALS, and a fleet of off the shelf F-18s/Rafales at twice the price they could have been had at 5 years ago.
New build Harriers anyone? Can BAE even make any more? Or did they quite sensibly destroy the jigs etc so they'd have to build new ones at even more cost?
Or maybe a U-U-turn on EMALS, and a fleet of off the shelf F-18s/Rafales at twice the price they could have been had at 5 years ago.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if the B model gets ****canned, then the RN est dans le merde.
S41
Last edited by Squirrel 41; 29th May 2013 at 19:39.
S41 - I agree entirely. The story behind this Flight article could well mark the beginning of the end for F35B. If so, it will be interesting to see how the USMC extricate themselves from the political corner they've been fighting in.
Remember the Marines punch above their weight in DC. I recall when the Osprey was all but given last rites, from Dick Cheney of all people. Then he ran into the buzz saw that is the Marine Corps lobby. Doesn't hurt that LockMart is also an 800 pound gorrilla.
I remember many speaking in past tense about the CH53E as well back many moons ago.
I remember many speaking in past tense about the CH53E as well back many moons ago.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Westie / Easy, hi
I agree - but the B is more expensive and lower performing that it is hard to see that it has a future in the resource constrained world of post-Afghanistan. If I were US DFESEC I'd have a quiet word with the USMC and pull the plug, with the missions filled by USMC F-35Cs off CVNs and extended AV-8Bs.
It probably means that everyone in the US is happy(ish) and that the UK loses out (but the RN becomes *much* happier when this means that they've got to go to EMALS and cats 'n' traps).
S41
I agree - but the B is more expensive and lower performing that it is hard to see that it has a future in the resource constrained world of post-Afghanistan. If I were US DFESEC I'd have a quiet word with the USMC and pull the plug, with the missions filled by USMC F-35Cs off CVNs and extended AV-8Bs.
It probably means that everyone in the US is happy(ish) and that the UK loses out (but the RN becomes *much* happier when this means that they've got to go to EMALS and cats 'n' traps).
S41
Last edited by Squirrel 41; 30th May 2013 at 00:54.
That is a good mid term stop gap. I can't speak to the B's performance other than so say I know the testing is continuing in Yuma from a friend who is in the periphery of the program. If its to be canned, the government needs to be swift about it as whatever succeeds the Harrier is already late to the party.
Current doctrine would have to drastically change if in the future the Marines possess neither the Harrier of the B model.
Current doctrine would have to drastically change if in the future the Marines possess neither the Harrier of the B model.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't met a USMC officer who doesn't want the F-35B (although I will concede this could be that no-one is prepared to break ranks) - and I have yet to meet a USN officer who wants the F-35C.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. 2030 is the date the last AV-8B is to be replaced by an F-35B... they will start being replaced around 2023 or so.
2. By 2030 the AV-8B will be just as viable in front-line combat as an A-4 Skyhawk is today.
3. There is no chance any will be sold back to the UK, as part of the life extension plan is dismantling the 72 ex-RAF airframes for wings, tail surfaces, and fuselage pieces to replace fatigued ones in USMC airframes... as well as using the engines and other parts for spares. OK, right now they are planning to keep a dozen or so intact in case they need to replace a complete airframe... but we'll see how long that lasts.
4. Thank you very much for those airframes and parts... without them we couldn't keep the AV-8Bs in service past ~2023.
2. By 2030 the AV-8B will be just as viable in front-line combat as an A-4 Skyhawk is today.
3. There is no chance any will be sold back to the UK, as part of the life extension plan is dismantling the 72 ex-RAF airframes for wings, tail surfaces, and fuselage pieces to replace fatigued ones in USMC airframes... as well as using the engines and other parts for spares. OK, right now they are planning to keep a dozen or so intact in case they need to replace a complete airframe... but we'll see how long that lasts.
4. Thank you very much for those airframes and parts... without them we couldn't keep the AV-8Bs in service past ~2023.
Last edited by GreenKnight121; 30th May 2013 at 06:30.
GR9s Live On
Maybe they have realised they have a couple of SUMS aircraft among the catch, worth all the work after all!!
Oh, the irony. So many absolutely true statements that, for more than 20 years, have brought ridicule down on anyone in MoD who so much as hinted at them.
MoD shut down the MoD(PE) ILS Unit in 1990 (the dedicated department whose staff managed equipment programmes from cradle to grave).
T
The RAF Chief Engineer slashed such work in 1991 and stopped most of it altogether in June 1993.
Now they know what we feel like having to maintain very small fleets!
RAF Chief Engineer disagreed with this in 1992, directing that "obsolescence" (he means unavailability, of which obsolesence is but one cause) management be cancelled altogether, even the reactive system.
The RN shut down their department responsible for AR&M in early 1988; following the RAF’s lead. If remaining staffs were interested, they did this work as a minor task if they had spare time.
As above, the MoD’s Materiel and Financial Provisioning regulations have not been implemented since 1993.
Much of this falls into the “No sh!t Sherlock” category, but it is nice to see such a senior person having these views published. Perhaps MoD will read this and (yet again) reinvent the wheel as a result of a pprune post! But what makes me laugh out loud is the key role a certain MoD staffer must play in the US’s efforts to implement all this. He’s on record as supporting every single one of the MoD decisions and policies I mentioned.
The USMC is understood to have 126 aircraft in its inventory, while the Italy and Spain have 16 and 17 respectively.
"There is a challenge of supply base viability," she said. "The requirement [to support] a small inventory is challenging enough. Seventy-five per cent of the Harrier supply base today is UK-based, and with the retirement [in 2010] of the GR.9 the [AV-8B] Harrier supply requirement has been cut by about a third. Maintaining a consistent level of manpower in these supplier shops becomes harder with a smaller inventory."
"Supporting the aircraft for 17 more years is challenging. However, the airframe is rugged and robust so it can get to 2030 for sure," Praiss said.
Work is done by the company's Integrated Logistics unit, which is itself part of the Global Services and Support division.
"There is a challenge of supply base viability," she said. "The requirement [to support] a small inventory is challenging enough. Seventy-five per cent of the Harrier supply base today is UK-based, and with the retirement [in 2010] of the GR.9 the [AV-8B] Harrier supply requirement has been cut by about a third. Maintaining a consistent level of manpower in these supplier shops becomes harder with a smaller inventory."
"Supporting the aircraft for 17 more years is challenging. However, the airframe is rugged and robust so it can get to 2030 for sure," Praiss said.
Work is done by the company's Integrated Logistics unit, which is itself part of the Global Services and Support division.
T
hese services comprise providing material support in terms of supply forecasting and modelling to support the aircraft; depot-level support; partnering with USMC Fleet Readiness Centers and working with OEMs to provide spares materials, training, and field services; engineering and logistics support that includes flight-testing; design and systems integration, and engineering analysis; as well as modernisation and retrofits.
The main challenges in supporting the AV-8B to the 2030 timeframe comprise maintaining the resources required to keep pace with operational and training requirements; maintaining the readiness of what is an ageing aircraft and offsetting issues of obsolescence, fatigue, and supply base viability; and implementing and maintaining capabilities that are required over the timeframe of the increased in-service life.
The main challenges in supporting the AV-8B to the 2030 timeframe comprise maintaining the resources required to keep pace with operational and training requirements; maintaining the readiness of what is an ageing aircraft and offsetting issues of obsolescence, fatigue, and supply base viability; and implementing and maintaining capabilities that are required over the timeframe of the increased in-service life.
The RAF Chief Engineer slashed such work in 1991 and stopped most of it altogether in June 1993.
The issue of maintaining resources takes on added importance in a platform as old as the Harrier, said Praiss. "One of the real challenges is in terms of resources to support those contracts. We are talking about small teams where we need to maintain the depth and breadth of the skills and capabilities, and expertise and knowledge associated with the airplane. We have coaching, training, and mentoring plans in place in order to ensure that we have people tomorrow who know this aircraft inside and out."
Now they know what we feel like having to maintain very small fleets!
Obsolescence management is especially important Praiss noted, saying: "Being proactive and performing risk mitigation in terms of obsolescence is key. This comes in the way of design changes, alternative sources of supply, and lifetime buys, etc.
RAF Chief Engineer disagreed with this in 1992, directing that "obsolescence" (he means unavailability, of which obsolesence is but one cause) management be cancelled altogether, even the reactive system.
Also, reliability and maintainability improvements are essential, and staying ahead of that with NAVAIR is extremely critical, as is using modelling and analysis to ensure that issues such as fatigue don't become real problems."
The RN shut down their department responsible for AR&M in early 1988; following the RAF’s lead. If remaining staffs were interested, they did this work as a minor task if they had spare time.
Overarching all of these challenges and enhancements is the importance of funding, and securing this is becoming ever harder in today's economic realities, Praiss noted. "We know that in today's [economic] environment, funding availability is in short supply. Funding is a challenge and we can't expect to have the same contracts today as we have had in the past."
The squeezing of the defence budget means that this effort must be carried out with the absolute minimum of expense. "There is a focus on affordability in the solutions that we provide," Praiss explained. "There is a contract that we have called Contractor Augmented Maintenance and Training, where we support the marines on the flightline. We have been able to reduce costs for the marines by USD14 million over last four years, [and] it has also enabled us to reduce mishaps to an all-time low."
The squeezing of the defence budget means that this effort must be carried out with the absolute minimum of expense. "There is a focus on affordability in the solutions that we provide," Praiss explained. "There is a contract that we have called Contractor Augmented Maintenance and Training, where we support the marines on the flightline. We have been able to reduce costs for the marines by USD14 million over last four years, [and] it has also enabled us to reduce mishaps to an all-time low."
As above, the MoD’s Materiel and Financial Provisioning regulations have not been implemented since 1993.
Much of this falls into the “No sh!t Sherlock” category, but it is nice to see such a senior person having these views published. Perhaps MoD will read this and (yet again) reinvent the wheel as a result of a pprune post! But what makes me laugh out loud is the key role a certain MoD staffer must play in the US’s efforts to implement all this. He’s on record as supporting every single one of the MoD decisions and policies I mentioned.