Harrier T12A - specops bus ?
 

I like many are still sniffling over the loss of Joint Harrier - I really don't care if the F-35B can pickle a JDAM down a nun's cleavage in a hurricane while simultaneously turning an entire squadron of Su-35s into spare parts, because it's not the Harrier, and it doesn't have 2 seats, which leads me to ask....

The ultimate 2 seat evolution of that incredible little fighter was of course the T12A which found itself wrapped around the uprated Pegasus 107 and I recall reading one of those Tom Clancy style techno thrillers many years ago where a 2 seat Harrier was used as a covert insertion platform, flying deep inside enemy territory to deliver an operative in some remote location and then VTOLing out to return with an empty seat.

Pure fiction of course but as I recall the inboards both had the big tanks, while the outboards carried pods holding personal weapons, supplies, and other 007 type gear for use by the operative.

All this got me to wondering how feasible this actually is in the real world, and what a T12A could do in that configuration. Exactly how much weight could it lift in VTOL for the subsequent pick up, and what would the practical unrefueled range be with a VTOL drop off/pick up and flight back.

I know it's strictly Boy's Own stuff but I thought I'd ask the guys who would know - so is it silly fiction or a practical option for specops delivery ?


PS - on the off-chance that this has actually been done, let's not go there, but I do have IM ;)

Well, I have pics of both a harrier (prob 5) and an apache with a personnel carrying pod prototype attached.

Me too :)

http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/x...b03b0667f7.jpg

http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/x...ae20ce84fc.jpg

Remember the BOAC Mosquitoes.

This was posted on YouTube last year



Good ol' ZB602 ;)

A proper bona mate will be along shortly to remind us who was flying it that evening........

Two seat a/s Harrier was to transport Jack Ryan from USS? to HMS?
My brian has just deed....
Book was Hunt for Red October

I miss the Harrier too.

When at an air show, after the end of the Harrier's display, seeing the pilot drop the nose towards the crowd as a final salute before either landing the aircraft or moving off to another display was something special for me and I won't ever forget it. It's just the little things that stay with you. Of course I won't forget the history of a little 'slow' Harrier sending big fire breathing jets to the scrap yard in the Falklands, neither will I forget seeing the videos of Harriers being scrambled to support troops on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. But the bow/salute to the crowd was my highlight.

Fonsini,

If you assume this would require a vertical take off, which it might not:

From memory an average 107, on an average day with tanks and ASW - but nothing else would give you a VTO of siro three thousand pounds of fluids (to include 500 pounds of water). So you would have siro 2000 pounds above MLA or 1300 before you needed to consider landing.

From memory that would give you 10 or so minutes at low level at 420 kts, so I'm going to go for 'about 70nm'.

However, I do recall the T12A had significant CoG limitations which were complex and would probably have impacted your ability to VL, VTO, transit and then VL again...one of those may well have been out of limits.

chiglet

JFK (carrier) to Invincible

Fonsini

The book was by Craig Thomas (Firefox) and was called 'Sea Leopard'. It involved an insertion of an American CIA / US Navy agent into the northern Soviet Union by a RAF Harrier T2 / T4 with the agent's kit in baggage pods. Mission was STO from Wittering, Tanker support all the way up to north Norway, Short Low level over the Soviet border VL, VTO, short low level back over the border and either tanker on the way back or land in Norway.

Great idea. One small detail which may have been overlooked.....



















It could be a bit quieter. :oh:

Yes - Sea Leopard, great memory,

So I guess this concept wasn't entirely fiction by the sounds of things, and thanks Orca - great technical info on the T12A.

The original requirement for T-12A was to allow the T-12 to have a decent safety margin of thrust on a hot, Wittering summer day. There were concerns with the T-10s hover performance so the study was done as to whether it was worth putting a Pegasus 107 (of which we only had limited numbers) into a T-12 rather than a 9A for Afghanistan.

I seem to remember seeing pictures of the personnel pod on Navy News, attached to a Sea Harrier. It looked rather snug.

For more fictional Harrier exploits James Bond flies one in the novel Win, Lose or Die by John Gardner.

Excellent, saves me searching my hard drive for them! 👍

The Pod shown in the above pictures still exists, it's on display at Gatwick Aviation Museum!

PM575

At risk of this being a daft question, why is the "door" at the front.? This necessitates the aircraft coming to full hover while brave passenger exits (by parachute?), very much increasing the risk. Surely if it was at the rear, the aircraft could maintain some forward speed. Also if the door/hatch didn't fully close, this would surely be a deal-breaker for return flight. Or was the plan to jettison entire pod...in which case wouldn't that blow the "covert" part of the insertion?

I had always assumed that this (to me) non starter relied upon you landing at both ends of the mission. I had also assumed it was for extraction in extremis vice the orderly deployment of the passenger.

The Apache pod was probably a response to the 'Flight of the Phoenix' in Helmand in '07. I understand they open at both ends.

Would have been handy..


http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...heRescue07.jpg

Orca, clearly someone didn't think it a non-starter as they spent lots of our money building it. But a requirement to land deep in enemy territory would surely have made it so, greatly increasing the risk, limiting the range and wiping out any covert element?

Shot one...

Yes, the door at the back would probably have been better from a 'dropping' point of view. Static line hook up on the hard point and then door open and pitch up. Sort of toss bombing. Could work and you'd probably find plenty of takers within that community who'd do it for the giggles alone.

Perhaps the plan was to arrive at full speed and come to a hover stop. The front door being open, the occupant would superman his way in to the field. Now thats how you arrive in style gents!

This is the original concept of the original AVPRO EXINT pod (EXINT = extract/insert). It was offered up for the Apache as well.

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-con...al-concept.jpg

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-con...-exint-pod.jpg

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-con...od-concept.jpg

And then there is the F35B fit if we ever get them!!!

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-con...nt-and-jsf.jpg

Love the smug look Bond gives the other agent in that clip.

Another similar fictional use of a VTOL aircraft, though using the two seat Yak-38 Forger-B, was in a Quatermass novel, in which one brought a Soviet scientist to London, landing in Hyde Park and using special pods to collect samples of material floating in the air on the way. The Forger was destroyed when a drunk mercenary managed to press the self destruct button while playing about in the cockpit. Oops.

I always thought that the pod idea is a great one but what circumstances could it be used where either insertion by submarine or helicopter or a HALO jump would not be available.

But the use of a two-seater for SOE-style insertions and extractions -despite the noise- could have been used under the right conditions.

Martin....I remember all the Quatermass stuff, right back to the original Tv serial "The Quatermass Experiment" in 1953, iirc. There were four TV serials, the three first ones on the BBC...including "Quatermass 2" and "Quatermass and the Pit" and the final one was on ITV and involved the Professor with an alien harvesting of humanity from stone circles. As far as I know, there are three books...being the scripts of the first three TV serials. I haven't come across any other Quatermass books...I would be interested in any other details you can give of the novel to which you refer? Was it written by Nigel Kneale, the original creator?
To get back on topic....I recall the London to New York air race in which the Harrier participated. I believe there was a move to hover the Harrier alongside the Post Office Tower and the Empire State building and have the passenger/conpetitor enter and leave by walking along the wing.....(!)

Molemot...

PM inbound.

ShotOne,

I'm sure they did, however I didn't! I think you can see why from the various CONOPs paintings, it would take a CVS's entire force of FA2s to bring back a mixture of rescuers and rescued numbering 16. From about 70 nm away maximum. On a high pressure, low temperature day. From somewhere you could get the stovies into and out of in squadron strength. Why not send a single junglie and use two fighters for RESCAP?

...nice idea for a bit of alcohol induced war gaming. No practical fixed wing application in my, as ever, humble opinion.

Like no one within 20 nm of the Landing Point perhaps?

Why have we decided this was a use for the two seater? The T10 and T12 had stacks of CoG corners, which I can't imagine this would help. Also why send two chaps when one would do?

'Cos an AWI in a single sticker would probably cock it up, at least a T12 would have a QFI in it to demonstrate his god like VSTOL handling............:)

Or maybe we've stumbled across the only use for a QFI! Getting out and closing the door for the SF. ;)

orca

Because its a T Mk 4 in the book (fit was 2x 100 gall tanks and 2 baggage pods). I've dug out my copy of the book and tried to work out how far the flight would have been from the references in the book. I reckon a low level phase one way of around 650-700km. Drops off the tanker over Norway in the area of Narvik, Low level over Norway with penetration crossings of Sweden and Finland airspace before crossing the Norwegian / Soviet boarder just south of Krikenes. Of course as soon as the Harrier was a reasonable distance back into NATO airspace, it could go high level, but that bit isn't covered in the book. Also the Harrier T4 were fitted with TFR according to the book.:ugh: Writers have no sense of distance.

The Extin pods were something that came along much later and at the time that the book was written, the GR5 was going to be a re-winged GR3 (1980).

And, on the big screen, in The Living Daylights.



I/C

Mainjafad,

I see!

If it helps (but in no way trying to detract from the writer's licence!):The 6600 lbs of fuel in the T4 would have given you 5800 until you needed to be in the landing environment, which at about 120 lbs per minute for 420 kts would give you a total range from tanker to hover/ crash of about 340 miles.

You could (as you say) profit from going high I think the high level bingo calculation was something like 1200 plus ten pounds per mile.

Why would SF need to do any of this? They are HALO trained. Kick 'em out at anywhere from 10 to 30K and see you later.

You're assuming a permissive air defence environment where you can cruise about in a herc.

There is little point to this delivery system in all but the most niche* application when you consider:

U.S. Special Forces & Polish Special Operations Forces. UH-60 Black Hawk Helicopter. - YouTube

A jet would require a decent piece of Tarmac bloody miles from the target. All advantages gained by speed are lost when there is a 10 mile offset that the 1 or 2 man team to cover to target. Just put a full team on target!!

Osama bin laden will testify. (Notwithstanding a screwup in the landing phase!!)

*suggestions welcome!

Your assuming its a job that requires a team... What about a job that just requires a spotting scope or a laser designator... The tasks exist, but the question is do they exist in sufficient quantities to justify an additional capability or do you just make do with playing with what you've got ?

So, in an attempt to summarise. Even the uber T12A would have to deal with restrictive CofG limitations that would make drop offs/pick ups very "tricky". Coming off the tanker with full tanks would only give 340nm to the landing point using low level penetration, and if you could go high level why use a Harrier anyway, just parachute in - then after the 340nm flight what exactly was the T12A supposed to burn for the return journey ?

Am I close ?

Also, I never did notice anyone mention what a T12A could VTOL lift in terms of fuel, 2 (empty ?) drop tanks, and 2 crew on an average soviet sunny day in the remote Russian Steppes, assuming of course that 007 had made his way to the rendezvous on a stolen moped - but that would be interesting if anyone has a lbs estimate?

Fonsini

340 NM total round trip and not counting time on the ground. In the book in question, the Harrier drops it's passenger off within 10 to 20 Miles of the Norwegian / Soviet border on a cold arctic night so hot and high isn't an issue, plus the only bits of the mission that are VL / VTO are in the middle of the sortie with tanker support either side (its just that the tanker has to be a lot closer to the drop off point than Thomas states in the novel). As most posts on here have stated, there are better ways of getting a large force on the ground, but the point of the Harrier in this matter is getting one or two people on the ground (and maybe back out) much in the same way as the RAF supported SOE with Lysanders in WWII.

MAINJAFAD - ah 340 round trip depending on ground delay, gotcha.

Any thoughts on how much fuel a T12A could lift in VTOL with 2 crew and 2 tanks?

My guess back in post 8 was 2500lb, if we really do need the extra bloke then we could say 2300lb.;)

The 340nm figure was for a T4 with 100 gallon tanks which gave it a total load of 6600lb.

Main...

Why not just use a Lysander...?