Harrier and Sea Harrier

[Weaver]

Or "Harrier-esque", maybe?  

"Harrierosity"?  

I believe I've suggested the CTOL Harrier conversion before as well. I saw it as something akin to a single-engined A-10 with long-span subsonic wings.

[Captain Canada]

Thanks Gondor. I'm wondering about the US Marines birds tho. They have all the old GR.9 airframes, so it seems to me that they could easily add the extra pylon and put a Sidewinder there, freeing up the outer pylons. I haven't seen or heard anything as such. Be a subtle whif tho eh ?

[Gondor]

Thanks Gondor. I'm wondering about the US Marines birds tho. They have all the old GR.9 airframes, so it seems to me that they could easily add the extra pylon and put a Sidewinder there, freeing up the outer pylons. I haven't seen or heard anything as such. Be a subtle whif tho eh ?

Yes they do , but only as a source of spares. Its not that easy to add the extra pylons, there could be local strengthening required, there's the wiring, software integration ........
I like the idea, simple and straight forward to do too.

Gondor

[Army of One]

Silly/strange as it may seem but....as they have the airframes could the wings not just be swopped over...? Surely it would be easier to wire in that way than adding the pylon.....

[Captain Canada]

Ya that's what I was thinking. Probably going to happen in my world anyway 

[Captain Canada]

I was just watching a video on FB of the USS Boxer and they were showing Harriers coming and going. One of them had a new scoop above the wing, it was even painted a different shade of gray.....Hmmmm.

Try and youtube it until I get a chance to find the link.

[Mossie]

Just found out an unusual fact about the Harrier from someone who works at BAE.  The weight of the pilot is critical, he has to be weighed before flight and a counterweight is moved in the tail accordingly.

One for the pub quiz.

[NARSES2]

Just found out an unusual fact about the Harrier from someone who works at BAE.  The weight of the pilot is critical, he has to be weighed before flight and a counterweight is moved in the tail accordingly.

One for the pub quiz.

I'm surprised that Harrier Squadron's didn't have an extra rank "Matron - WO1"  Just imagine her at lunch time 

[PR19_Kit]

That's because the CG has to be EXACTLY on the thrust centreline when the thing takes-off, for a VTO anyway. IIRC the tolerance is about an inch!

Presumably it's not so critical for landing as they must use fuel and ammunition during flight, and for CTOL or STOL flights they can trim any offsets out with the tailplane trim.

[Mossie]

Thanks Kit.  Makes you wonder what would happen if they confused metric and imperial and got the counter weight in the wrong place.

I've got a question, when the Harrier GR.5 came into service it was painted in NATO green over lichen green.  None of the rest of the front line fleet got this paint scheme, so why was it only applied to the Harrier?

The only other aircraft I got a similar scheme was the Hercules, although I believe it was a different shade.

[Thorvic]

Thanks Kit.  Makes you wonder what would happen if they confused metric and imperial and got the counter weight in the wrong place.

I've got a question, when the Harrier GR.5 came into service it was painted in NATO green over lichen green.  None of the rest of the front line fleet got this paint scheme, so why was it only applied to the Harrier?

The only other aircraft I got a similar scheme was the Hercules, although I believe it was a different shade.

Because it was still intended to be forwad deployed to the field so they experimented with GR3s in both overall greys and another in greens. The helicopter fleet also went green, the Wessex and Puma a two tone wrap whilst the Chinnooks went overall green

[Mossie]

Ah yes, forgot about the helicopters, thanks Geoff.  I needed to know if the colour was peculiar to the Harrier II GR.5 and if any alternatives to it may have worn the green scheme, I guess they would.  Cheers!

[ysi_maniac]

Studies on non vtol Harrier

[zenrat]

Studies on non vtol Harrier

That's good drawing there.
What engine/s and where are the wheels?

I will build my take on a "Harrier B" (as i'm calling the non-VTOL version) one day.
My concept is it will use a much as possible of the VTOL version (Harrier A) as possible but not have the swivelling nozzles and the attitude control stuff on wingtips, tail and nose.
Engine would still be a Pegasus but with the bypassed air exiting around the jet exhaust to provide an element of shrouding to mask it from IR seekers and cameras.
It's a completely mental process so far.  I'm having issues thinking out the arrangement of the rear undercarriage and the jet exhaust.  I'd like to retain the usual undercarriage arrangement but I would also like to have a single jet pipe.  I don't think I can have both.

[ysi_maniac]

Engine and undercarriage arrangement can be similar to Jaguar's one