Armada EAV-8B Harrier II PLus (Matador) pair at RIAT 2019

[LateArmLive]

Originally Posted by AndoniP

Loved that smoke on full power. Nice to see them hover and hear that sustained noise.

What was the time limit for hovering again? 2-3mins? I didn't notice any injection of water into the intake for cooling, or i may have missed it completely.

There wasn't strictly a time limit for hovering from memory (it's been a decade!) although there was a limit for having the RCS energised I think. Many used to think the 90seconds of water was the limit - that could certainly be true for the smaller engined jet on a warm day, but I guarantee it hovered just fine when you ran out of the wet stuff... just a bit warmer!

You wouldn't notice water injected into the intake as it went straight into the combustion chamber. The darker smoke tended to be an indicator of water injection as it disrupted the flame pattern a little whilst cooling the engine. Again, it's been a while and I am sure there's plenty I've forgotten over the years.

[orca]

90 seconds of water, 2 1/2 minutes with nozzle deflected until the big engine came along when that limit disappeared.

[NoHoverstop]

180 seconds if your leaping heap had the half-flow mod (but then you weren't allowed wet take-offs, or was that for another reason?). 2 1/2 minutes was very much an "ish" thing wasn't it? Various UK operators seems to have pet likes/dislikes in the rule book anyway, so depending on which hat you wore Farley climbs were OK/verboten, likewise mini-circuits eventually I think. Or just possibly I wasn't always paying attention.

Originally Posted by orca

90 seconds of water, 2 1/2 minutes with nozzle deflected until the big engine came along when that limit disappeared.

[orca]

It was an ‘ish’ thing in everyday life because there was no way of measuring or recording it...it became a real thing if AOC said something like ‘Isn’t there a limit on time with nozzle deflected?’ at your PDA and appointed a chief sneak to time you.

Sadly the good book (ACM) would be against you and very clearly in chief sneak’s favour at this point.

Whereupon your display would be abbreviated somewhat.

That sort of ‘ish’ thing!

[sandiego89]

Can anyone comment on any difference on hovering with gear up or gear down? Handling difference? I seem to recall that with gear down it helped trap some air underneath the airframe/in the wheel wells, and also believe puffer activation has to do with nozzle postion, not gear position. I wound think you would normally want gear down for hovering near the ground (but I do realize that with a significant engine cut out in the hover the result is predictable). So is gear up hover for "flair" only?- I do admit it looks good.

[noprobs]

Bomber, I was there on Sunday to see them perform the show finale. I’m sure you would have enjoyed it - I certainly did.

[ex-fast-jets]

Thank You Bob!!

I hope that tears were running down your cheeks as you watched it.

If I had been there with you, we could have had nostalgic memories of what was good in life in the past, and what might have been.

I still consider our premature ending of the Harrier in service to be a measure of the insanity of our politicians and the equal insanity of those who agreed to its demise.

Happy memories which get better as I get older!!

[Mogwi]

Originally Posted by sandiego89

No, I do not recal any AV8B/Gr5/7/9 achieving a real world air to air kill. Nor any AV8A/Gr1/3 for that matter. Only the Sea Harrier I believe. Happy to be corrected

You are quite correct sandie. Last Harrier kill was my wingman in SHAR XZ499 at c1950Z on 8th June 1982.

Swing the lamp!

mog

[orca]

Sandiego - hover with the wheels up limits the engine as opposed to the higher ‘Lift’ ratings available with the gear down.

[Mogwi]

Originally Posted by orca

Sandiego - hover with the wheels up limits the engine as opposed to the higher ‘Lift’ ratings available with the gear down.

In the tin-wing Harrier it also inhibited the auto-stab, which made it quite twitchy.

mog

[Treble one]

My second photo shows the transition from hover into something which (I think) was a Spanish version of the 'Farley Rocket' (with the greatest of respect to the late great JF).

I am assuming this requires careful management of throttle/nozzle/stick settings/positions......?? Otherwise you end up in a big smoking pile of Harrier?

[orca]

It’s ‘just’ a full power transition from the hover to wing borne flight, keeping a fairly constant alpha and therefore climbing.

The ‘Farley Climb’ was more of a ‘rotation around the nozzles’ which needed a whole lot more care and attention.

[Treble one]

Thank you Orca. I guess JF was an absolute master of the aircraft to be able to do that.

[pr00ne]

POBJOY,

​​​​​​"...so we can get some capability back into the system."

Er, what capability would that be then?

[alwayslookingup]

Originally Posted by TEEEJ

Correct. The seat is inactive. Note no seat harness.

At 2:21 what does the Pilot do to his helmet? Looks like he's flicking a couple of clips forward. Thanks.

[Green Flash]

Helmet internal web tensioners, if memory serves. It pulls his fighting hat tighter onto his head and helps cut out the engine noise. Happy to be corrected if not.

[alwayslookingup]

Originally Posted by Green Flash

Helmet internal web tensioners, if memory serves. It pulls his fighting hat tighter onto his head and helps cut out the engine noise. Happy to be corrected if not.

Thanks. Yep, it looked something like that but thanks for the info.

[Treble one]

Have just watched JF perform the Farley Rocket at Farnborough in 1982. Looks like after a vertical take off to around 30-50 ft wings level, he climbs at an AOA approaching 70-80 degrees.

Had to laugh at Raymond Baxter commenting that 'it wasn't recommended for squadron pilots'.

[Tay Cough]

I seem to remember reading the RAF banned the Farley Climb. The RN didn’t.

[Treble one]

Its ok then Tay Cough, he did it in a SHAR (Indian) :-)