Harrier

File: dsgas.jpg (409KB, 800x2317px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 800x2317px

No

>>27957685
Well, it is flying, which is more than can be said for the F35-B

File: db7cdc6b1a760b9830efcbc838283554.png (33KB, 1138x626px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1138x626px

>>27957784

>>27957685
maybe

Not quite. its still a very capable machine, and can be fitted with exactly the same missiles and munitions.

Its not as easy to fly or as integrated as the f35s - particularly in VTOL landings, its down to pilot control, not computerised systems, Generally, its performance isnt as good.

but is it a "turd"? no. its just no longer cutting-edge tech.

>>27957784

Top kek.

Well, it was introduced in 1969.

In a field like aerospace, especially fighter aircraft, it's hard not to show your age after that kind of time.

>>27957685
never was good. It's the f-35 of the past

>>27957725
>>27957771
>>27957803
I don't know.

>>27957771
God this is some cringe worthy shit.

File: 2zR6YuD.jpg (24KB, 510x498px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 510x498px

>>27957804
> VTOL landings
>Vertical takeoff and langing landings

>>27957771
>>27957838
Why the fuck is animu now featuring supposed vehicles taking form as lolis with personalities.

>>27957847
Japan did it to drum up recruitment for their military.

Its like what the Navy did with TopGun except without the badass homoerotic undertones.

>>27957847
This thread is shit so honestly it deserves it.

File: 1344438409839.jpg (27KB, 300x393px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 300x393px

>>27957841
Yes. VTOL Landings.

as in ,its quite a handful to do landings were you descent vertically. Takeoffs being a bit more straightforward from what I've read..)

I'm sorry that you don't quite have the reading comprehension to understand the words "particularly in VTOL landings" and understand the actual context.

>>27957847
>>27957865
>Not Jap
>Not animu
It's from Worst Korea, guys.
But in all reality, that's just the autism in me speaking.

>>27957841
Not even him but you are an autistic retard

>>27957895
*were you

wHere you, even.

brit VTOL space magic

File: QinetiQ's VAAC Harrier achieves world's first automatic landing on a ship.jpg (570KB, 2883x1781px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 2883x1781px

>>27957685
It's an aircraft that has been around for more than half the history of manned flight.
It is still a bit rough around the edges and if you put a nugget in it he will probably get a fatal spanking.
Pic is an F35 autoland control system getting a shakedown.

>>27957898
C*reans are just counterfeit japs anyways.

>>27957902
>>27957895
Why not Vertical landings you humongous faggots

>>27957685
It's got more air to air kills than a lot of things flying nowadays.

File: Harrier GR9A.jpg (101KB, 750x566px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 750x566px

>>27957826
Can you repeat the question...

File: SeaHarrier_2.jpg (549KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 2048x1536px

Since this is a harrier thread,

What are the differences on capabilities and design between a Sea Harrier and a Harrier II ?

File: gr3lgbs.jpg (111KB, 800x841px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 800x841px

>>27958034
Aren't most of those kills from the South Atlantic tiff :)

>>27958066

The Sea Harrier has radar because it needs to perform fleet defense. The Harrier II may also have this, but baseline harriers definitely don't.

Nah oldies but goldies

>>27958069
Of course.

Has anything else actually got an air to air gun kill since?

>>27957895
Vertical Take Off and Landing landings.
ATM machine

It's redundant and makes you sound like a massive faggot who uses acronyms to seem like you know what you're talking about.

In this case Vertical landings would make more sense or the general VTOL or VTOL operation if you insist on acronym use.

File: GVTOLChristoCloseup.jpg (109KB, 652x803px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 652x803px

>>27958066
I'm sure this chap will be happy to point you in the direction of his books.

>>27957813
>Well, it was introduced in 1969.
The first version yes. All the current airframes flying are going to be from the mid 80s to early 2000s though.

Brits have always been the gods of VTOL/STOVL

They made the lift fan in the F-35B too

File: 1444494338020.jpg (63KB, 680x681px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 680x681px

>>27960449

>They made the lift fan in the F-35B too

>>27960460
Not >>27960449 but BAE Systems did have a decent part in the F35 project

>>27960460
Rolls Royce is a British company. They did the majority of the work on the Bs Integrated Lift Fan Propulsion System.

File: harrier_in_the_field.jpg (70KB, 600x364px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 600x364px

TFW the Harrier was originally designed to operate from dispersed 'alert pads' in Europe in case of WW3. That's why it had VTOL: So that when NATO's air bases all got nuked or cratered in the first hour, the front-line troops would still have CAS in the Fulda Gap.

The idea of exploiting their VTOL for carrier ops came later.

>>27957685
Planes don't become suddenly massive turds.
It's still an unique aircraft providing unique capabilities.

>>27957895
>Talks about reading comprehension
>doesn't understand you just said landings landings

Dude go read up what VTOL means.