Harrier dispute between Navy and RAF chiefs sees Army 'marriage counsellor' called in

[BritinBritain]

BritinAfrica

The Harriers principal job was is to protect the fleet...in 1970. Unfortunately it has been surpassed by 2 generations of aircraft development. Nor does the Harrier have BVR capability as it cannot fire missiles other than AIM-9L and M Sidewinders which are strictly short range self defense weapons.

From the information I have received, Harriers have got or will have BVR capability.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1996/1996 - 1716.html

Even more then 30 years later, the Harrier is a very important asset to the RN.

I also disagree with your statement about rapid construction. Both the British and the French were able to rapidly complete the construction of new Battleships in time for WWII. The Battleship Strasbourg for example was fully completed in two years. A US Liberty Cargo ship was once built in 3 days. These rapid construction programs are costly but are perfectly feasible.

Building a Liberty ship in 3 days isn't exactly the same as building a modern day carrier, neither is building a modern day carrier the same as building a WW2 carrier. On board equipment is far more complicated.

Also keep in mind the Invincible class carries as many choppers as they do Harriers. In fact for the invasion of Iraq they ONLY carry helicopters, no harriers were on board. As it stands now the Invincable is really more useful as a LPH than as a CV.

Albeit helicopters are useful bits of kit, I'd rather have a couple of squadrons of Harriers backing me up in addition to helicopters in the ground support role. The RAF or the USN will not always be there to protect a British fleet, so as I have stated before, until the F35's are brought on line, its imperative that the Sea Harriers stay in operation.

Keep in mind that Invicible has already been decommisioned, Illustrious will be decommisoned in less than 3 years and Ark Royal in 6. Frankly the chances of the UK needing CV within that time is astronomically small.

The problem here is, is not the decommissioning of a ship, but air support until the new carriers are on line and equipped with F35's.

 

[mmarsh]

BritinAfrica

Did alittle more research and it turns out we are both right and wrong to a degree. The AIM-120/Blue-Vixin Radar was fitted to the Sea-Harrier FA2, however the Sea Harrier was decommissioned 4 years ago and replaced withe the Harrier GR9 which isnt equipped. The MoD did consider upgrading the GR9 with the Blue-Vixin but this was rejected as being too expensive at a cost of 600 Million pounds.

By contrast the American Harrier II AV8B is equipped with a different rader (the APG-65) which can carry AIM-120s

Ill get to the rest in a follow up I have to run now...

 

[BritinBritain]

BritinAfrica

Did alittle more research and it turns out we are both right and wrong to a degree. The AIM-120/Blue-Vixin Radar was fitted to the Sea-Harrier FA2, however the Sea Harrier was decommissioned 4 years ago and replaced withe the Harrier GR9 which isnt equipped. The MoD did consider upgrading the GR9 with the Blue-Vixin but this was rejected as being too expensive at a cost of 600 Million pounds.

By contrast the American Harrier II AV8B is equipped with a different rader (the APG-65) which can carry AIM-120s

Ill get to the rest in a follow up I have to run now...

The capability is there to upgrade the British Harrier to BVR, but typically of those who hold the purse strings deemed it too expensive to upgrade. They'd rather loose a multi million pound carrier, then upgrade their present systems. This has always been the story with various British Governments.

Up to 1980 my unit was equipped with AEC Militant 10 ton Mk1 6x6 trucks fitted with a crash gearbox (see my picture on the left) built from 1952 until around 1966. The trucks had a top speed of 29 MPH, not 30,......29, empty, loaded, up hill, down hill, or over a cliff. Soviet tanks were faster then that! At times a brave soul would knock the truck out of gear going downhill, only to experience a dangerous speed wobble at 35 MPH!

While the truck itself was pretty good across country, its on road ability was painful, some convoys were rammed at the rear from faster traffic on the motorways. Drivers even resorted to wearing ear muffs because the engine inside the cab was so damn noisy. In 6 wheel drive with a 10 ton load on board, turning the brute was a task in itself, many drivers put one foot on the dash and pulled on the stering wheel with both hands.

It wasn't until around 1981 my unit was re-equipped with new Bedford TM 8 tonners which could at least keep up with traffic. This is the thing, we had crap equipment yet was expected to do the job.

In conclusion, the Harrier does have the ability to be upgraded, and a valuable asset to the fleet.