[PaulSS]

It was (and still is with the USMC) a highly versatile and effective aircraft, and could operate off ships of a 'through deck' design rather than just from airfields on land so why it was 'retired' I'm at a loss to understand.

Money. The Sea Harrier needed the bigger donk if it was going to be used effectively and bring back AMRAAM to the ship. The RN's money had been committed to the F35 quite some time ago, so we had to wave goodbye to the SHAR. The RAF, too, didn't have the spare cash to keep their Harrier fleet going but I suspect there was also a fair bit more politicking going on, especially when the top Crab was a Tornado man. I wonder which aircraft they chose to keep

The lack of an ILS was not a factor. Pretty obvious why it wasn't for the SHAR but the introduction of MADGE (a microwave approach system) meant that you could get all the guidance you'd get from an ILS system but you could also change the approach course.....which helps as ships generally don't want to sail in just one direction For the RAF, yes a portable TACAN was a possibility but there were other 'imaginative' ways of creating in-aircraft approaches with GPS marks or, with the AV8B II+, using the expandable radar maps to designate a touchdown point and then following the guidance to that point. It's easily possible to designate something like the arrestor cable and fly to that. There were other possibilities too. ILS was really not a snag for a battlefield aircraft.

Only a Harrier viffing could change direction so suddenly that it confused the Blindfire logic.

I think someone was pulling your leg, FMJ VIFFing really did not lead to a sudden change of direction and certainly not enough to 'leap' out of a radar beam. In a turning fight it could be used to incrementally nudge the nose round a bit and try to 'thrupenny bit' a circle. This just meant the nose moved a little closer to the circle and no sudden direction change. It was good for slowing down quickly (perhaps in concert with a loaded barrel roll) and forcing a fly through if someone was behind you......I don't know about having anyone behind you in a fight; we'll have to ask Gaznav what that's like It could be used in the vertical: going up you could VIFF and then quite quickly get your nose going down (this normally scared the carp out of both drivers) but I reckon a radar lock would have stayed put and VIFFing in the vertical nose down, while exceptionally useful for forcing guys to fly through, would have allowed your radar to stay locked even more easily.

I remember seeing a newspaper article where the Harrier was flying along with a baddie behind him, VIFFed and magically jumped vertically, while still facing the same direction and then the baddie flew underneath and the hero Harrier slotted into his six. The reality is that if you VIFFed in that scenario you'd stay at the same level and just slow down quickly. I believe a lot of these type of reports became lore and VIFFing was tantamount to the Klingon's cloaking device. The truth is that is was useful in certain regimes but it cost energy and I'm afraid caused a younger FMJ to be fed a certain untruth

The only problem I can see with the F35 is that I'm not flying it. I am, however, quite envious of those who get to operate it off such a well designed platform.

[chevvron]

MADGE; Microwave Airborne Digital Guidance Equipment ; that brings back memories.
Conceived in the early '70s and tested at RAE Bedford; the pilot was able to select final approach track and glidepath angle (within certain limits) and like MLS, (which Bedford were also testing at the time) guidance was displayed on an ILS type display.
The transmitting aerial for both FAT and GP was all in one and it was transportable and could be set up anywhere.
Would have been ideal for Harriers operating from dispersed sites but apart from testing it, did the MOD ever buy it?

[PaulSS]

It was a good bit of kit and one hoped the Madge gods were kind at night, or else it was back to a CCA (Carrier Controlled Approach), a bit like an SRA but cobbled together using the ships' navigation radar

The display was easier to use than an ILS. Steering symbology for left/right was displayed on the HUD's heading and the 'glidepath' was a little triangle on the outside of the Radalt display, so you just pitched to match the triangle and Radalt needle (there were pitch guidance lines on the main 'horizon' display as well). There were even little indications on the distance display as to when to take the hover stop and nozzle nudge, in order to bring you alongside the boat in the hover. All much, much nicer than a dodgy talkdown when the ship was pitching all over the place and it was as black as a black thing on black night.

I don't know if the RAF ever had it in the field but the RN certainly strapped them to the back of the steamers so, yes, the MOD did buy some of them.

[JoeC]

Wonder why they designed the engine cover as a huge barn door that opened into wind rather than something that for example opened and closed around the fuselage. Is the position/size part of the hover function or purely functional?

[Dave W]

I understand (but very much second hand knowledge) that there is an aerodynamic function for the lift fan upper door, in that with some forward motion in the low speed regime (in to wind) entrained airflow is 'smoothed' as it enters the top of the fan.

[Paul_Sengupta]

I remember seeing a newspaper article where the Harrier was flying along with a baddie behind him, VIFFed and magically jumped vertically, while still facing the same direction and then the baddie flew underneath and the hero Harrier slotted into his six. The reality is that if you VIFFed in that scenario you'd stay at the same level and just slow down quickly.

I believe this inspired a certain film. Can't remember the name off-hand, but I believe it involved sunglasses.

[GAFlyer4Fun]

I believe this inspired a certain film. Can't remember the name off-hand, but I believe it involved sunglasses.

Iceman's sunglasses?

[Bill McCarthy]

I wonder what the effect will be when the aircraft goes through a huge goffer from the bows. I don’t think the fan would like ingesting large quantities of salt water oggin. How would the F35 be refuelled at sea, in say, in the south Atlantic if another Falklands conflict came to the fore.
I maintain that the carriers will be populated with a number of UAVs in certain situations.

[Dave W]

Naturally, none of those things will have had a moments' thought from the Operational Analysts, Designers, Manufacturers or the User Community.

[joe-fbs]

I am very pleased to see that the Fleet Air Arm once again has full Find, Fix, Strike capability.

[johnm]

Military aeroplanes carrying humans in 2018, nuts

[chevvron]

Military aeroplanes carrying humans in 2018, nuts

Supposed to have been 'banned' by Duncan Sandys in 1957

[PaulSS]

I wonder what the effect will be when the aircraft goes through a huge goffer from the bows. I don’t think the fan would like ingesting large quantities of salt water oggin.

I think it will handle the water going through one side of a fan and out the other much better than the same amount of water going all the way through the engine. The Harrier would have had around 75% of whatever passed through the first stages of the compressor going out through the cold nozzles, which is pretty much the same effect as going through the fan, so it should actually be better than the Pegasus at handling things like that. If the waves are big enough to go over the ski-jump of the QE then they won't be flying anyway.

How would the F35 be refuelled at sea, in say, in the south Atlantic if another Falklands conflict came to the fore.

From fuel pumped from the ship, the same as aircraft have always been refuelled at sea.

[Steve J]

The wrong ships with the wrong aircraft. Carriers of this size should be capable of operating all NATO carrier aircraft (F-18s, F-35Cs, Rafales, E-2s etc) and not just the F35B and helicopters.

Steve

[Dave W]

If anybody wants a truly informed and comprehensive public domain description of why F-35 is designed as it is, as well as the compromises and route to the decisions taken by the UK for the return to fast jet carrier ops, they should search out posts by 'Engines' on the PPRuNe Military Forum.

For example, this quite superb post describing the powered lift system of the F-35B.

I have been most privileged to work with the real life incarnation of 'Engines' on a number of UK procurement programmes, and I can state with confidence that what he says is as it is. (And he's a thoroughly decent - and often times, hilarious - chap at that. )