RAF Harriers

It looks like we don't need the duplicated abilities of Tornado and Harrier. The Tornado has greater abilities, and only loses out on the VSTOL thing. A crying shame, but the Harrier's days were numbered anyway, as are Tornado's. Rather than reduce both fleets, it makes financial sense to remove one completely.

Tony

quote:

Originally posted by JamieWednesday:
Can someone please explain the decision to dump these?

With Wittering being our local airbase, I find it astonsihing that the flight over my car yesterday may be the last time I see any!

Can somebody explain why on earth we'd want to keep it?

I struggle to be sentimental about machines for killing people. My RAF pilot friend tells me it is not terribly good at that anyway. He described it as a bit like Concorde, plenty of 'wow' but actually rather rubbish, and dated.

Bruce

Chaps

The Harriers are out of date and need replacing. I want the UK to be protected by the best equipment and if something better is available then it is a no brainer.

I dare say the Harriers will be mothballed to fly around at country shows to keep the sentimentalist happy.

Regards

Mick

quote:

I struggle to be sentimental about machines for killing people. My RAF pilot friend tells me it is not terribly good at that anyway. He described it as a bit like Concorde, plenty of 'wow' but actually rather rubbish, and dated.

Yeah but if you're going to go around killing people...I mean WOW...What a way to do it. Much better than throwing rocks at them or something.

quote:

if something better is available then it is a no brainer.

I dare say the Harriers will be mothballed to fly around at country shows to keep the sentimentalist happy.

Are they being replaced by something better? Triffic. Mick, you keep the sentamentalist in me happy. I'll be sorry when you're gone too.

Why can't the Royal Navy use 'pretend' inflatable-balloon Harriers tied down on the decks on show just to frighten the enemy?

They did something similar in WWII which managed to bamboozle Jerry.

Also, why not tell the world we have a dozen or so trident nuclear submarines with incredible technology that makes them so undetectable no one will ever no where they are? (But in reality we won't have any at all) Would be completely harmless compared to the real dangerous trident plus save wasting a huge amount of tax revenue!

We could always have the odd pretend inflatable nuke-sub tied up in dock just for show, just like that inflatable pretend one that drifted on the Isle of Skye beach yesterday

...are they doing this idea already?

Debs

quote:

...are they doing this idea already?

cat out of bag me thinks...

Funnily enough, a Russian company has recently announced inflatable tanks that can fool heat-seeking missiles into thinking they're genuine.

Tony

We could just park a few inflatable submarines on various sand bars around the world!

because the American's want the RAF to buy their latest hitec fighter the F35, which incidentally doesn't work particularly well either and costs a fortune to run ....

........and has no pylons for carrying external stores. VERY limiting.
I'm in favour of building new Hunters and equipping them as Lorti in Canada have. Could sell them overseas by the hundred, and put us back on the map of aerospace manufacturing. Rather than just making wings and shipping them off to Toulouse :-(

Our Conservative government has ordered 65 of the F35, which are unproven and cost billions ... all without tender.

So, we bend over and let the US have its way with us, we have one of the strongest economies in the G20, we've been in Afghanistan from the beginning, we lose to Portugal for a seat on the UN Security Council and we have to give billions to US defense contractors ?

The UK is the largest foreign partner in the F35 programme, contributing about 10% towards the development costs. Again though, as per a thread a few months ago, it's far better than anything any possible enemy will have for the next few decades.

Tony

How about Rafael on the carriers? I can't really see the point of the F35.

Why did the UK jump on the F35 bandwagon, when we ignored the f16/f18 when they were much more groundbreaking when introduced?

The F16 is still more capable than anything the Taleban have (second thoughts anything that has flown in the last 80 years would be). And as a top echelon fighter the F22 is unequalled.

Who are the next generation of planes meant to deter? China have the numbers but the technology appears to be at least 20 years behind

At a guess, when the F16 and 18 were being introduced we were busy with Tornado. It's an old dog now, but has served well and has earned the UK (and me) a few quid from Saudi. The latest F18 would still be a good option.

Tony

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:

Can somebody explain why on earth we'd want to keep it?

I love any machine that kills someone who is trying to kill me.

Ian

quote:

Originally posted by ianmacd:

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:

Can somebody explain why on earth we'd want to keep it?

I love any machine that kills someone who is trying to kill me.

Ian

With all their weapons of mass destruction.....

[quote]The F16 is still more capable than anything the Taleban have quote]....or seem to need.

I'm more concerned about the loss of the Nimrod.

Gonna have to get my eyes tested.
Thought it said Rolf Harris.