Sea Harrier FA2 - a modern-day F6D Missileer?

In sci.military.naval Brian Sharrock twisted the electrons to say:
The three 'Invincible class, Through-Deck-Cruiser, vessels that were
inherited are to be replaced by _two_ something? ; although nobody is yet
cutting metal, onto which will be embarked something else?

Well to be honest there's really only two Invincibles left (Illustrious &
Ark Royal), since it looks unlikely that Invincible herself will ever go
to sea again ...

Meanwhile the RN FAA's and the RAF's Harrier entities have been absorbed
into 'Joint Force Harrier' and somewhere along the way the RN's
Fighter/Strike aircraft have been .... ?

.... but if they spent the money replacing the engines on the FA2s, then
what would happen to the moreschoolsandhospitals?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

Jacek wrote:
I guess there are never any "back-up" weapons - but only different
weapons for various scenarios.

Isn't that just a nicer way to put it? Anyway, BVR missiles are the
primary weapon of any modern fighter aircraft, but as you put it, there
are certain cases in which IR missiles are also useful.

Mvh,
Jon K

Brian Sharrock wrote:
I'm too _young_ to have direct experience of the RNAS cum RFC merger but
combined with my direct experience of Healey's Defence White Paper, with its
immortal phrase - the fleet will not fight out of range of land based
aircraft-, I've got a horrible feeling of deja-vu!

On the other hand, what would have been realistic budget alternatives,
if taking money somewhere else is ruled out? At least the FAA has a
hope of a better future to come... when JSF arrives, late...

Mvh,
Jon K

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alistair Gunn wrote:
In sci.military.naval Brian Sharrock twisted the electrons to say:
The three 'Invincible class, Through-Deck-Cruiser, vessels that were
inherited are to be replaced by _two_ something? ; although nobody is yet
cutting metal, onto which will be embarked something else?

Well to be honest there's really only two Invincibles left (Illustrious &
Ark Royal), since it looks unlikely that Invincible herself will ever go
to sea again ...

Meanwhile the RN FAA's and the RAF's Harrier entities have been absorbed
into 'Joint Force Harrier' and somewhere along the way the RN's
Fighter/Strike aircraft have been .... ?

... but if they spent the money replacing the engines on the FA2s, then
what would happen to the moreschoolsandhospitals?

the moreschoolsandhospitals I can probably live with, it's the money
wasted whilst indecisive/incompetent morons make their minds up I have
trouble with.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health...html?gusrc=rss

£600,000 a day to pay contractors to stand around and do
nothing...shakes head
I suspect most of the Shar cost savings got used up in that one farce.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFETh0yPtE9aGlEHpERAhchAJsGgE9LPDKXeOslU9vjYQ eT3scZmgCfStq9
ylQyAwsYubgTRsiYYA/k7OA=
=B/kg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message
. ..
In sci.military.naval Brian Sharrock twisted the electrons to say:
The three 'Invincible class, Through-Deck-Cruiser, vessels that were
inherited are to be replaced by _two_ something? ; although nobody is yet
cutting metal, onto which will be embarked something else?

Well to be honest there's really only two Invincibles left (Illustrious &
Ark Royal), since it looks unlikely that Invincible herself will ever go
to sea again ...

Are you a Tonie Phonie? I wrote "_three_ ... inherited",; count 'em;-
Invincible, Ark Royal, Illusttious - all vessels in the fleet in 1997. The
sad fact that the vessels are not availlable currenntly is a
product/artefact of the CND members that now occupy Downing Street.
The sad decline of the CVS assets from three to two is not a justification
for only having two 'replacements' ... ! You're not chanting 'Three Ships
bad! Two ships better!" ; are you?
{Neither is RY Brittania, the paying-off ceremony for which B-Liar didn't
attend - He had another engagement in his diary - now, what was it? Oh, yes!
He was _welcominig_ Gerry Adams and cohorts to Downing Street! ]


Meanwhile the RN FAA's and the RAF's Harrier entities have been absorbed
into 'Joint Force Harrier' and somewhere along the way the RN's
Fighter/Strike aircraft have been .... ?

... but if they spent the money replacing the engines on the FA2s, then
what would happen to the moreschoolsandhospitals?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

--

Brian

wrote in message
oups.com...
Brian Sharrock wrote:
I'm too _young_ to have direct experience of the RNAS cum RFC merger but
combined with my direct experience of Healey's Defence White Paper, with
its
immortal phrase - the fleet will not fight out of range of land based
aircraft-, I've got a horrible feeling of deja-vu!

On the other hand, what would have been realistic budget alternatives,
if taking money somewhere else is ruled out? At least the FAA has a
hope of a better future to come... when JSF arrives, late...


The FAA only has a future if it AAA acquires aircraft (almost any aircraft)
and
BBB Pilots for said aircraft ... the 'papers report that FAA recruitment is
'cause for concern'

--

Brian

In sci.military.naval Brian Sharrock twisted the electrons to say:
"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message
Well to be honest there's really only two Invincibles left (Illustrious &
Ark Royal), since it looks unlikely that Invincible herself will ever go
to sea again ...
Are you a Tonie Phonie?

I dunno, what is a "Tonie Phonie"??? (A phoney Tony would presumably be
someone pretending to be called Tony?)

The sad decline of the CVS assets from three to two is not a justification
for only having two 'replacements' ... ! You're not chanting 'Three Ships
bad! Two ships better!" ; are you?

No, because if I was going to say that I *would* have said that. My
point was that the reduction to two ships has already happened.
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

jokoch wrote:
What's the maximum no. of AMRAAM FA2 can carry? It has 2 wing pylons,
and if it uses 2 double rail pylons, that would be 8 on 2 wings.
However, I've seen drawings with 2 AMRAAM on the fuselage. That makes
10 AMRAAM altogether!!! Wonder what other plane carry more AMRAAM than
FA2 apart from superbug?


The Sea Harrier FA.2 can't carry anything like 10 AMRAAM; the twin rail
pylon is for Sidewinder only. My understanding is that the max missile
load is more like 4 AMRAAM (2 on the fuselage in place of the gun pods
and two on the outer wing stations) or 2 AMRAAM (on the fuselage) and 4
Sidewinder (twins on the outer wing stations).

The inner wing stations are almost invariably loaded with fuel tanks.
I've never heard of them hanging missiles there; those pylons may not
even be wired for AMRAAM.

Unfortunately, pictures of real Sea Harriers with live missile loads
seem to be rare as hen teeth.

--
Tom Schoene lid
To email me, replace "invalid" with "net"

"Thomas Schoene" wrote ...
jokoch wrote:
What's the maximum no. of AMRAAM FA2 can carry? It has 2 wing pylons,
and if it uses 2 double rail pylons, that would be 8 on 2 wings.
However, I've seen drawings with 2 AMRAAM on the fuselage. That makes
10 AMRAAM altogether!!! Wonder what other plane carry more AMRAAM than
FA2 apart from superbug?


The Sea Harrier FA.2 can't carry anything like 10 AMRAAM; the twin rail
pylon is for Sidewinder only. My understanding is that the max missile
load is more like 4 AMRAAM (2 on the fuselage in place of the gun pods and
two on the outer wing stations) or 2 AMRAAM (on the fuselage) and 4
Sidewinder (twins on the outer wing stations).

The inner wing stations are almost invariably loaded with fuel tanks. I've
never heard of them hanging missiles there; those pylons may not even be
wired for AMRAAM.

Unfortunately, pictures of real Sea Harriers with live missile loads seem
to be rare as hen teeth.


Rumor has it that aside from the blue, inert exercise "concrete" versions,
the budget only stretched to a couple of dozen, held in a secret bunker
somewhere in Yorkshire, plugged in like recharging cell phones, awaiting the
summons to Armageddon...

I suspect an actual weapons load of two per a/c is about all the acquisition
budget will stretch to, but the big occasion is Mess Night, when the active
pilots draw lots to select the lucky individual chosen to fire this fiscal
year's single training round, one of the half dozen spares in inventory.

TMO

"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message
. ..
In sci.military.naval Brian Sharrock twisted the electrons to say:
"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message
Well to be honest there's really only two Invincibles left (Illustrious
&
Ark Royal), since it looks unlikely that Invincible herself will ever
go
to sea again ...
Are you a Tonie Phonie?

I dunno, what is a "Tonie Phonie"??? (A phoney Tony would presumably be
someone pretending to be called Tony?)

A Tonie Phonie is someone who says one thing ' Trust me, I'm a straight
kinda guy! ' while being as bent as a left-handed corkscrew!

The sad decline of the CVS assets from three to two is not a
justification
for only having two 'replacements' ... ! You're not chanting 'Three Ships
bad! Two ships better!" ; are you?

No, because if I was going to say that I *would* have said that. My
point was that the reduction to two ships has already happened.

And to bedeplored ... not to be used as an excuse for announcing that only
two will be ordered in replacement. YMMV

--

Brian