Sea Jet
The SFDO Shars recently took part in the air show at Culdrose, as reported here.
The RAF representation felt thin on the ground, but the RN turned out a significant number of base airframes, which was particularly pleasing, perhaps the highlight being the clutch of Sea Harriers from the School of Flight Deck Operations, which actually taxied over on the Tuesday preview day.
Note the picture above this paragraph, and the ones on the right of the page.
On a slightly different note, has anyone else noticed that since the end of the Sea Harrier as a frontline aircraft, the frigate or destroyer on Atlantic Patrol Task (South) spends more time at and around the Falklands themselves than a few years ago, as if to make up the shortfall in deterrence.
One last thing, can anyone lend me a few £££ for XZ459?
The RAF representation felt thin on the ground, but the RN turned out a significant number of base airframes, which was particularly pleasing, perhaps the highlight being the clutch of Sea Harriers from the School of Flight Deck Operations, which actually taxied over on the Tuesday preview day.
Note the picture above this paragraph, and the ones on the right of the page.
On a slightly different note, has anyone else noticed that since the end of the Sea Harrier as a frontline aircraft, the frigate or destroyer on Atlantic Patrol Task (South) spends more time at and around the Falklands themselves than a few years ago, as if to make up the shortfall in deterrence.
One last thing, can anyone lend me a few £££ for XZ459?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 8th May 2009 at 21:14.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post 1983 sums the the demise of the once superb FAA up perfectly. Once the big carriers were gone the rest was (glorious) history. IMO of course.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WE Branch Fanatic. Perhaps the time on FI task just reflects that things in W Africa are relatively calm at the moment. Interesting that, following your link on to
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/s...ediaFile.17267 ; Dumbo's berth looks more like S Georgia than FI.
-16-12-2005]dc.jpg)
Countering incipient thread drift, now.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/s...ediaFile.17267 ; Dumbo's berth looks more like S Georgia than FI.
Countering incipient thread drift, now.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are there any subscibers out there who would care to contribute their actual combat experiences in the Sea Jet.
Very little written other than the very obvious high profile "I did it on my own" authors.
Very little written other than the very obvious high profile "I did it on my own" authors.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maryland
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SHAR XZ439 is back in the UP status! 
We purchased two GTSs and ran them both installed (the best looking) one and ran the engine. Taxied twice and did a couple of medium power engine run. A/C generator problem was fixed also. Keeping looking to nallsaviation.com for updates.
SHE WILL FLY, AGAIN SOON!!!!!
We purchased two GTSs and ran them both installed (the best looking) one and ran the engine. Taxied twice and did a couple of medium power engine run. A/C generator problem was fixed also. Keeping looking to nallsaviation.com for updates.SHE WILL FLY, AGAIN SOON!!!!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Planet Zob
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats ZA195 - the first FRS2 (F/A 2) to fly. I remember it well, the aircraft was sitiing at the end of the runway late one sunny afternoon (Heinz Frick), having done all its engine checks and we were STILL awaiting for Airworthiness clearance from Kingston to work its way down by carrier pigeon. Ah happy days at the 'fold.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burgess Hill
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZA 195 1st flight
Yes -I remember that sunny day in September 1988 and all those people standing anxiously around the control tower and along the grass at Dunsfold. When Heinz eventually did get airborne all I could think off were all these cooling and bleed air ducts winding back and forward along the rear equipment bay groaning under pressure for the 1st time. I was the Programme Manager for the update of ZA 195 ( Handling aircraft) and XZ 439 (1st systems aircraft) - I must have carried most of their bits in the back of my car down the A3 from Kingston to Dunsfold during 1988 through to 1989 when XZ 439 flew for the first time. (March 1989 I think).
The Nalls Aviation website certainly does have more information. A couple of videos as well as photo albums, and all the updates. I expect that in time there will be more to follow.
Art Nalls and his dedicated team took an aircraft, dismantled it, shipped it over to the States, reassembled it, tested it, modified bits when they had problems, fitted a new ejection seat, overcame a number of technical problems (see the updates), fitted new communications equipment (a requirement of civil registration?), striped out and replaced most of the cockpit instrumentation, ground run it, taxied it, and after gaining the correct licences etc, flew it. A major achievement by any standards, particularly when you consider that the work was done mostly done at weekends by people giving up their time. Their enthusiasm and dedication is admirable.
What makes this even more significant is the fact that this was achieved without the involvement of the likes of BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, Martin Baker, etc. Similarly the fact that they had no trainer or simulator, although Art does state that he benefited from using the AV8B simulator and was able to reproduce the performance of the Sea Harrier.
This is hugely encouraging and helps support the case that the Sea Harriers sent to RNSFDO might be available for regeneration in a genuine national crisis. If nothing else they are in a better shape than if they had been left to rot in a field, as they are in MOD(N) hands, kept in a hangar, regularly powered up and moved around, and maintained. Mothballing them in a controlled environment was unlikely to have ever have been an option for cost reasons.
In this scenario the big boys (BAE Systems, Rolls Royce etc — and of course the Harrier IPT) would be involved, funding would be available and personnel found. With respect to training, it is significant that there are Harrier T8 trainers that have been kept at Culdrose, as well as the FRADU and RNFSF(FW) Hawks flying at Culdrose and Yeovilton. And the RAF Typhoon force could help teach air/air skills, ironically it has a radar derived from Blue Vixen. Additionally I believe the Harrier GR7/9 guys do air to air training still.
As I see it, the weak links would be obtaining the necessary funds and permission from Ministers, and getting an appropriate heads up from the intelligence community — and the politicians not ignoring it. Not to mention an appetite for innovation and lateral thinking, two qualities I associate with naval aviation.
Changing the topic, I note that the Sea Harrier has been recently discussed (here) on the RN forum on the Warships1 message board. Although I am not a member of that forum, I do visit from time to time. That discussion brings a couple of "what if?" type question to mind. How good would the Sea Harrier have been had the FRS1 to FA2 modernisation gone further than it did and included (as Nozzles referred to early on in this thread) the RN's desire for extensive changes to the airframe, in particular a revised (presumably larger) wing, post 1982? What if the planned upgrade to the FA2 (upgraded engine, Link 16, improved nav/attack system, better cockpit controls etc) by late 2001? Would the decisions have been any different, or would the beancounters have still be determined to wield the axe?
A Sea Harrier came close to a kill over Bosnia. Had the engagement taken place would it have made a difference to the argument, and that of the RAF's fighters (cut from five squadrons (the SDR level) to four, then to three)?
I think it is reasonable to say that the Sea Harrier punched above her weight, particularly when you consider how few were built. Leaving aside the Falklands, the Shar made a significant contribution to the Navy's capabilities. Apart from fleet air defence these included reece, ground attack, long range maritime attack with Sea Eagle and a tactical nuclear capability. In all these roles the reach of the fleet was extended considerably, contributing both to national and NATO capabilities. Sea Harrier also contributed to the UK technological base, for example, the development of Blue Vixen, as discussed here, and from which the Captor radar used by Typhoon was developed.
Likewise the Sea Harrier achieved a a high level of media interest. I remember seeing a series on BBC2 in late 1996 called Decisive Weapons, with an episode covering the Harrier, and in particular the Sea Harrier. As you would expect the events of 1982 were covered in detail, and Sharkey Ward and Dave Morgan were both interviewed. I remember the programme starting with archive film of experimental P1127/Kestrel flying and bumpy landings to the sound of Chi Mai by Ennio Morricone. Stirring stuff indeed! I also it appearing a lot in RN careers literature that was printed in the 80s and 90s, and adverts. I remember that when Top Gun was shown on UK television for the first time, the first advert was a RN careers one, which concluded with a shot of a Sea Jet lauching from a CVS and the slogan "Give Your Ambitions A Chance".
I really do miss seeing and hearing them in the South West skies. I have, however, found that there is still a video (in a variety of formats) of the Sea Harrier on the RN website. There is also a screensaver.
Art Nalls and his dedicated team took an aircraft, dismantled it, shipped it over to the States, reassembled it, tested it, modified bits when they had problems, fitted a new ejection seat, overcame a number of technical problems (see the updates), fitted new communications equipment (a requirement of civil registration?), striped out and replaced most of the cockpit instrumentation, ground run it, taxied it, and after gaining the correct licences etc, flew it. A major achievement by any standards, particularly when you consider that the work was done mostly done at weekends by people giving up their time. Their enthusiasm and dedication is admirable.
What makes this even more significant is the fact that this was achieved without the involvement of the likes of BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, Martin Baker, etc. Similarly the fact that they had no trainer or simulator, although Art does state that he benefited from using the AV8B simulator and was able to reproduce the performance of the Sea Harrier.
This is hugely encouraging and helps support the case that the Sea Harriers sent to RNSFDO might be available for regeneration in a genuine national crisis. If nothing else they are in a better shape than if they had been left to rot in a field, as they are in MOD(N) hands, kept in a hangar, regularly powered up and moved around, and maintained. Mothballing them in a controlled environment was unlikely to have ever have been an option for cost reasons.
In this scenario the big boys (BAE Systems, Rolls Royce etc — and of course the Harrier IPT) would be involved, funding would be available and personnel found. With respect to training, it is significant that there are Harrier T8 trainers that have been kept at Culdrose, as well as the FRADU and RNFSF(FW) Hawks flying at Culdrose and Yeovilton. And the RAF Typhoon force could help teach air/air skills, ironically it has a radar derived from Blue Vixen. Additionally I believe the Harrier GR7/9 guys do air to air training still.
As I see it, the weak links would be obtaining the necessary funds and permission from Ministers, and getting an appropriate heads up from the intelligence community — and the politicians not ignoring it. Not to mention an appetite for innovation and lateral thinking, two qualities I associate with naval aviation.
Changing the topic, I note that the Sea Harrier has been recently discussed (here) on the RN forum on the Warships1 message board. Although I am not a member of that forum, I do visit from time to time. That discussion brings a couple of "what if?" type question to mind. How good would the Sea Harrier have been had the FRS1 to FA2 modernisation gone further than it did and included (as Nozzles referred to early on in this thread) the RN's desire for extensive changes to the airframe, in particular a revised (presumably larger) wing, post 1982? What if the planned upgrade to the FA2 (upgraded engine, Link 16, improved nav/attack system, better cockpit controls etc) by late 2001? Would the decisions have been any different, or would the beancounters have still be determined to wield the axe?
A Sea Harrier came close to a kill over Bosnia. Had the engagement taken place would it have made a difference to the argument, and that of the RAF's fighters (cut from five squadrons (the SDR level) to four, then to three)?
I think it is reasonable to say that the Sea Harrier punched above her weight, particularly when you consider how few were built. Leaving aside the Falklands, the Shar made a significant contribution to the Navy's capabilities. Apart from fleet air defence these included reece, ground attack, long range maritime attack with Sea Eagle and a tactical nuclear capability. In all these roles the reach of the fleet was extended considerably, contributing both to national and NATO capabilities. Sea Harrier also contributed to the UK technological base, for example, the development of Blue Vixen, as discussed here, and from which the Captor radar used by Typhoon was developed.
Likewise the Sea Harrier achieved a a high level of media interest. I remember seeing a series on BBC2 in late 1996 called Decisive Weapons, with an episode covering the Harrier, and in particular the Sea Harrier. As you would expect the events of 1982 were covered in detail, and Sharkey Ward and Dave Morgan were both interviewed. I remember the programme starting with archive film of experimental P1127/Kestrel flying and bumpy landings to the sound of Chi Mai by Ennio Morricone. Stirring stuff indeed! I also it appearing a lot in RN careers literature that was printed in the 80s and 90s, and adverts. I remember that when Top Gun was shown on UK television for the first time, the first advert was a RN careers one, which concluded with a shot of a Sea Jet lauching from a CVS and the slogan "Give Your Ambitions A Chance".
I really do miss seeing and hearing them in the South West skies. I have, however, found that there is still a video (in a variety of formats) of the Sea Harrier on the RN website. There is also a screensaver.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 1st Dec 2007 at 19:25.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ha Ha.... Good one... I remember the Sea Eagle... what a complete crock of Poo that system was.... Oh how we laughed when the SHAR launched with one strapped on knowing full well that the aircraft wouldn't be able to land again..... Now, why would anyone design and build a weapon that did that? Beyond me.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Well Vec, I remember having a chat with Sqn Ldr Graham Pitchfork who ran a Buccaneer sqn in 80s telling me what a good weapon it was - and why. Somehow I trust his opinion more than yours.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh how we laughed when the SHAR launched with one strapped on knowing full well that the aircraft wouldn't be able to land again
Before the Sea Eagle was cleared we had to demonstrate a VL with one on one side only. We did not have a Sea Eagle handy so we did it with a Martel which was bigger and heavier (and in case you do not realise why bigger is worse it is because the induced flow downwards that exists round the aircraft in the hover presses down on the top surfaces of any stores).
It is amazing how duff gen persists and the way people keep pushing it out and so just just let themselves down again and again.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really ??!
Vec etc
To further J'F's mention, in later trials I photographed our 2-seat demonstrator Harrier G-VTOL from almost ( directly is not a good idea ) underneath while it was in the hover carrying a real Sea Eagle one side, nearly empty drop-tank the other etc, the trials also included 1,000lb bombs.
It was agreed that 'bring-back' with 2 Sea Eagles was not an option, but given cost & more importantly fuel, who was going to do that anyway ?
The trials were mainly flown by Heinz Frick, and it seems even in the 2-seater he had a margin to play with, as he chased my photographic boss Jim Moore around the airfield in jetborne mode for a laugh !
I've never bothered learning to post photo's here - should have I know - but can supply the relevant shots if you like -
Andy Lawson, [email protected]
To further J'F's mention, in later trials I photographed our 2-seat demonstrator Harrier G-VTOL from almost ( directly is not a good idea ) underneath while it was in the hover carrying a real Sea Eagle one side, nearly empty drop-tank the other etc, the trials also included 1,000lb bombs.
It was agreed that 'bring-back' with 2 Sea Eagles was not an option, but given cost & more importantly fuel, who was going to do that anyway ?
The trials were mainly flown by Heinz Frick, and it seems even in the 2-seater he had a margin to play with, as he chased my photographic boss Jim Moore around the airfield in jetborne mode for a laugh !
I've never bothered learning to post photo's here - should have I know - but can supply the relevant shots if you like -
Andy Lawson, [email protected]
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks DZ
If memory serves the only sensible Sea Eagle mission was one plus a full tank for range.
Two Sea Eagles and internals only would have been a short range panic reaction. The general consensus was that the Sea Eagle was about 1.5 to 2 times an Excocet and we know what they did.
If memory serves the only sensible Sea Eagle mission was one plus a full tank for range.
Two Sea Eagles and internals only would have been a short range panic reaction. The general consensus was that the Sea Eagle was about 1.5 to 2 times an Excocet and we know what they did.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Indeed, the weapon of choice for ASuW . More than twice the range of Exocet, bigger warhead, better target discrimination and the ability to fly dog leg attack profiles. Having seen what just one did to HMS Devonshire during trials, I wouldn't want to get hit by one.
Plan B would be to take your frigate with its 4 MM38s to within 25 of your target and hope Uncle Ivan isn't awake.
Plan B would be to take your frigate with its 4 MM38s to within 25 of your target and hope Uncle Ivan isn't awake.