Ignore the bit where he is a little bit dismissive to the whole design and engineering nation behind it, but it's great to know someone is setting up a flying force for the iconic craft before it ever retires, much better to do it whilst it's still flying.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
CAT-THE-FIFTH (26-06-2015),DanceswithUnix (26-06-2015),mikerr (27-06-2015),MrRockliffe (26-06-2015),Tumble (26-06-2015)
What a dudeShame on the Tories for scrapping ours as well - it was well ahead of it's time.
Originally Posted by The Quentos
Don't go Blaming tories.....it's the numpty who said "other planes are faster and fly higher" ignoring how quickly a Harrier can be air born and going flat out while the Uber jets are still going through pre flight and trying to get supersonic...that cost us the bestplane ever made in our gun rack
And...even over the hurricane...it is the best plane we've ever. And Lancaster and Vulcan are included
. And the Meteor. And the other myriad beauties we've made.
And yes. Though Tumble knows.. The spitfire is included
The harrier is...was...and has been....the ultimate all rounder
Having seen an SR-71 take off, and a trio of Lightnings go straight up on their tail in formation, I think the Harrier is actually third in airshow stopping ability of making everyone turn around and gawp.
Awesome and such a pretty thing though. Could have been handy to have some for that farce of an aircraft carrier that we are still building.
The Eurofighter was pretty spectacular to watch at airshows, especially when they get it to climb vertically upwards from low horizontal speed. Immense power and noise from the Rolls-Royce engines. Harrier never did it for me. I always saw it as well, it has rotating thrust nozzles so what's so amazing about it taking off vertically? (no intention to start a flame war).
But still, it's capabilities of a multi role aircraft do amaze me. I was gobsmacked when I heard it was being removed from service!
XBOX Live - Sheep Sardine | Origin - MrRockliffe | Steam - MrRockliffe |
Add me
Still prefer the sight you get when a previously undetected helicopter gunship pops up from behind cover!!
It was labour if it was anyone....
The thing is that it wasn't really liked by enough top brass because we've got a piddling contest between Navy, Air force and Army. All of whom want to be doing different things, and often not care about helping the others. This is why the only people really still using them are the US Marines, because a mobile combined force projection unit sees their value as mobile missile launching platforms. No one has dog fights of WW2 anymore, by Vietnam the yanks had learned it was more about sigwar against ground, then eventually against air too.
Some nice pics, notice the year... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-farewell.html
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Was happily swimming in the sea not 300ft from that harrier the day it went for a swim.
To err is human. To really foul things up ... you need a computer.
I wish I could agree, but it was a decision taken in the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) the coalition undertook, very soon after coming to power, published in October 2010, and jointly signed by Cameron and Clegg. It's in the "Defence" section, which is Part 2, and page 26 to be exact.
As for whether it was the right decision, I don't know, I'm not a defence expert. But the argument when something like this ....
"We can't afford everything we want, so we have to choose. So, we decide what we think we need to do, which is support combat operations in Afghanistan, and provide fast-jet capability with long range, and we can't do that with Harriers, but we can with Typhoons and JSF. "
Arguably, I suppose, it could be claimed that the decision was because, as Liam Byrne so fatefully put it, "There's no money left", and THAT was Labour's fault. And the resulting 'necessary' austerity resulted in sacrifices they otherwise wouldn't have made. But the actual decision was a coalition one, not Labour.
Personally, I loved the Harrier. It's an icon of my childhood, and a testament to British ingenuity. BUT .... that's not good enough reason to keep it if it cannot fulfil the role needed in a changed world, under VERY hard financial contraints. We need a defence capability that is the very best we can afford in belt-tightening times, not just a beloved icon.
could someone who has access to the airgun blue book or any other info please let me know what the lunar jet might be worth in good condition. thanks so much in advance...
Less than 10GBP.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lunar-Jetman...-/121495933793
Hi Kit,
Sorry for my ignorance, but what's the difference between running on JET and being protected by it?
Thanks,
Alex
Its a real shame he decided to pull the US patriot card on such an iconic and epic piece of British engineering, but I guess each to there own. I hope he can stockpile parts to keep them going well into the future.
Damn.
Wrong Jet - thought this was going to be about Diane Youdale for a moment
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
