Chris Werb Posted October 11, 2018 Posted October 11, 2018 Shep, that low light shooting video you posted was amazing.
shep854 Posted October 11, 2018 Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) Shep, that low light shooting video you posted was amazing.I was amazed as well. I was pretty sure many of the night-firing photos I've posted had been somehow enhanced, but that video proved otherwise.Well, 'Step' does beat 'Shemp'... Edited October 16, 2018 by Chris Werb
Chris Werb Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018  That landing was not unlike the ones routinely performed by greylag geese in the fields around my home  Constantly having to jettison mega-expensive weapons in the Adriatic was a big reason why the Sea Harrier was canned.
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 Well, that didnt HAVE to do that. You can come on board in a hover loaded, but it means you are going to have to jettison a lot of fuel. And I think the early harriers had about a minute of water. Even the early AV8B's reportedly only had a minute to get on board their ships before they used up all the water. I think in the end, it was just one more excuse given to get rid of them, particularly as they had just had an engine update. Thanks for the video Shep. You know, that aircraft is actually coming on board slower than a WW2 Swordfish or Wildcat(Martlet)....
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 Kinda disappointed they didnt use the ski jump, but maybe that would have been showing of a bit... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGhBDSk6b1E
Josh Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 I wouldn't have thought that burning off fuel would be huge problem for the harrier. But there were severe limitations to how long it could hold the hover and not overheat. I don't think it ever got much past the minute mark that Stuart mentioned. The F-35 in comparison apparently can hold it for a longer amount of time, though I haven't seen the stat. Were harriers incapable of a rolling landing I assume? Is this something made possible by new tech with regard to flight control systems? Everything I've read seems to indicate the F-35B is actually quite easy to fly. The accident rate for all types is still only four class As with no fatalities, something you couldn't say about the F-15/16 at this point, let alone harrier.
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 The B's they have now I THINK have a larger tank. Or at least the model in DCS seems to last a little longer, maybe 1 minute 30 or 2 minutes. It also has a natty button to use it in combat which I thought was interesting. Anyway, there is a very good Osprey book on the AV8B in 1991 (when it was effectively day attack only) and they said they were very marginal coming back to the carriers. But I dont believe they had to jettison much to do it. Of course, the Sea Harrier is properly a Harrier 1 not a Harrier 2, but that said, India seemed to operate them fairly effectively off Vikrant, and that is the tropics as well. Harriers were even capable of rolling landings, though it wasnt very easy because you had the nosewheel longer than the trailing one, so you had to fair at about 5 degrees or so I guess, just to get a level landing. They apparently trained the GR1/3 pilots to land like this in case a nozzle jammed, usually the first flight they did. There was actually a case where someone effectively deadsticked a Harrier in from 30000 feet when he swallowed a compressor. The engine was still running but the throttle was at idle because it was vibrating so much, so it did have its uses even if they didnt do it very often. So you can effectively land a harrier 3 ways, conventional, Stol (which seems to have been the common way in Afghanistan) and Hover, though as said, its marginal if you have a large mount of fuel and are heavily loaded. I think its about 1500lbs of fuel, so you dont get many missed approaches when trying to land on a carrier. The RN and I think the USMC always tried to match speed with the carrier, then shoulder in and land on the hover. The new STOL approach is very new for a carrier, and something I believe we have been trying to develop for over 20 years. What was previously known as the Bedford Landing Array.https://combataircraft.keypublishing.com/2018/10/15/uk-f-35b-debuts-landing-technique/ The problem with the Harrier was training. The RAF gave all new pilots an initial run through a helicopter program, which though its not really like flying a harrier, its similar in some respects. I think the USMC initially had a good cadre, but one RAF pilot training them said one of them was overconfident and cocksure, and sure enough he was among the first to have an accident. So I think attitude carries a long way. It would be interesting to see how big the water tank is on the F35, I quite agree. I would also be interested to know how much sucess they have had operating them of FOB's, because ive a feeling they will prove far more challenging than Harriers. Melted roads will be not the least of the problems Im thinking of. I struggle to see them operating F35B's like this, but it would be interesting to give it a try.https://youtu.be/lykFvqPk_Y4?t=133
shep854 Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 I had to mute the last video, due to the hideous synth voice... Rolling landings are pretty routine for Marine Harriers for land ops, where stopping space isn't quite as critical. In the age of small, cheap PGMs, deployment far forward is pretty risky, but an improv V/STOL field a bit to the rear is still lots easier than a full runway; and of course, a whole runway of a busted up captured airfield isn't needed.
DB Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 Rolling landings probably didn't give any benefit on the Invincibles given how small they were.
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 No, and the Tarawa's seemed to have even less deckspace, probably due to the size of the bridge. Be interesting to see what the USMC does if they bring any AV8B's aboard. Its certainly got the room for stol landings.
Josh Posted October 16, 2018 Posted October 16, 2018 It also has a natty button to use it in combat which I thought was interesting. Natty button?
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 Natty= Classy, Clever, blingy. Eg 'That waistcoat you bought is well natty'.
Josh Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 Still not sure what the button is in this context.
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 (edited) Its combat thrust.  In the Av8B you have a switch, for take off power, or landing power water injection. It gives extra power when entering a hover with weaponry, which as said was marginal in hot regimes (particularly with the older engines). The Combat button does the same thing, though presumably not at the same flow rate, to create more power, presumably when entering a dogfight or some other situation when you want to get out of dodge in a hurry. Short of implementing plenium burning, its the nearest the Harrier has to an afterburner. Im not sure if this was available on AV8A or Gr1/3 or Sea Harrier, but its certainly there now.https://publicintelligence.net/u-s-navy-natops-av-8b-harrier-ii-flight-manuals/ Edited October 17, 2018 by Stuart Galbraith
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 (edited) You can see here, he is implementing take off water injection. Its a 3 position switch, takeoff, off, and landing (vstol) injection. You cant see very well but underneath there is a CMBT button, which is combat injection.https://youtu.be/q_6rfb6vHwQ?list=PLml_c09ciucvv3CIsWImCEqY5XIdbfPxu&t=348 Edited October 17, 2018 by Stuart Galbraith
Josh Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 Would this mean that pilot could use up his water supply before returning and not be able to hover?
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 17, 2018 Posted October 17, 2018 I think he could hover, but it may mean he would have to dump pretty much everything he has to do it. in DCS you have to dump fuel to get down to 1500 pounds. If you get the Osprey book on the Harrier deployment to Iraq in 1991, the pilot describes having one minute of water, before he goes into the drink. Which suggests that they were pretty marginal early on in hot weather, at least with the early engines.https://www.amazon.co.uk/Harrier-Operations-Desert-Shield-Aircraft/dp/1849084440/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1539781638&sr=8-3&keywords=harrier+iraq
shep854 Posted October 21, 2018 Posted October 21, 2018 Synthi-voice not too bad in this video about the rolling landing:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs8o2MXQudI
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 I have to give the MOD credit, they are doing a great job at showing this asset off.
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 Some night launches on here.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO3QC2EyCOk
shep854 Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 'The Redcoats are Coming!' Somebody grease the bloody rotors!!
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 22, 2018 Posted October 22, 2018 A friend asked why they went there, I said it was probably to have a piss up and stock up on Bagel's.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now