remaining RN, RAF flyable Harriers sold to US Marines

[CougarKing]

link

The Ministry of Defence finalised the deal with the Americans last night but the move has been described by Royal Navy officers as “crass” and a “shocking waste”.

One officer said the US was getting the aircraft for “peanuts” after the millions spent on them.

It is also likely that instead of being flown that the Harriers will be broken up for spares despite having seven years of flying life left.

The details of the deal have emerged just a day after Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, the First Sea Lord, stirred up the defence debate saying the Harrier would have made the Libya mission more effective, faster and cheaper.

He also warned that the Navy would not be able to sustain its operations in Libya for another three months without making cuts elsewhere.

It is understood that the majority of the 40 serviceable Harrier GR7 and GR9s will be sent to America where their engines and general hardware such as cockpits and flaps will be used to service USMC aircraft.

The fleet of ageing US Harrier AV8Bs has to remain in service for several years longer than planned because their replacement, the jump jet variant of the Joint Strike Fighter, is years behind schedule.

Admiral Sir John “Sandy” Woodward, the commander of the Falklands Task Force described the decision as “crass beyond belief”.

“The Americans have got themselves a bargain as our Government does not know what it’s doing. This is a shocking waste of taxpayers money.

“These Harriers should be flying off a Navy aircraft carrier today bombing Libya and bringing the campaign to a quick conclusion but instead they are being flogged for scrap.”

A total of 70 Harriers were upgraded in the last decade but only 40 were still serviceable to fly when the Joint Force Harrier, run by the Royal Navy and RAF, was axed under the defence review last year.

The aircraft had been extremely successful in Afghanistan particularly the GR9 version which had powerful Rolls Royce engines, new weapon installations, targeting pods and helmet mounted displays.

A Ministry of Defence insider said: “If we are going to do anything with them sell the Harriers to the US is not a bad option in terms of cooperation.”

 

[Redeye]

link

Have to agree with the sentiment that at least they got something for them.  It's interesting that the RN is looking at new carriers, but there's no aircraft for them to fly off them.

 

[George Wallace]

Have to agree with the sentiment that at least they got something for them.  It's interesting that the RN is looking at new carriers, but there's no aircraft for them to fly off them.

Looking at some of the problems that the US and NATO are having in finding locations in SW Asia to base UAVs flying over Afghanistan and Region, perhaps we will see the development/deployment of large scale UAVs from carriers.  The advantage would be that their "Base" would be highly mobile and there would be no requirement to get countries like Yemem to grant access to and/or permission to build land bases.

 

[Redeye]

Looking at some of the problems that the US and NATO are having in finding locations in SW Asia to base UAVs flying over Afghanistan and Region, perhaps we will see the development/deployment of large scale UAVs from carriers.  The advantage would be that their "Base" would be highly mobile and there would be no requirement to get countries like Yemem to grant access to and/or permission to build land bases.

Now that is an interesting application indeed - I wonder how easy landing a drone on a carrier deck would be - I suppose it couldn't be that hard.

 

[NavyShooter]

X-47B UCAS
Program Overview:
The X-47B is a tailless, strike fighter-sized unmanned system currently under development by Northrop Grumman as part of the U.S. Navy’s Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstration (UCAS-D) program. Under a contract awarded in 2007, the company has designed, developed and is currently producing two X-47B aircraft. In the 2013 timeframe, these aircraft will be used to demonstrate the first carrier-based launches and recoveries by an autonomous, low-observable relevant unmanned aircraft. The UCAS-D program will also be used to mature relevant carrier landing and integration technologies, and to demonstrate autonomous aerial refueling by the X-47B aircraft.

(Emphasis mine)

http://www.as.northropgrumman.com/products/nucasx47b/index.html

The program has already seen slippage from end 2009 to first quarter 2010 for some of it's flights according to "wikipedia"  :  but within the next 2 (or more) years, it may work.

Then there's the question of a deployable operational system....who knows when that would follow, but they at least included a full-size weapons bay in the demonstrator model!

NS

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Now that is an interesting application indeed - I wonder how easy landing a drone on a carrier deck would be - I suppose it couldn't be that hard.

Anything I have read  and been told about carrier ops from US Naval, Marine and UK aviators, have never described landing on a pitching flight deck as in easy or routine feat. Landings and launchings are described as the most dangerous and difficult times for these flight crews. While a UAV would not have a flight crew to risk, the pilot would have an either harder time I would bet because he would not be be able to judge pitch and roll of the sea.

 

[eurowing]

Auto landing is a very viable option.  The Heron UAV has it, but I bet the programming to account for a moving runway would be interesting to say the least.

 

[brihard]

Anything I have read  and been told about carrier ops from US Naval, Marine and UK aviators, have never described landing on a pitching flight deck as in easy or routine feat. Landings and launchings are described as the most dangerous and difficult times for these flight crews. While a UAV would not have a flight crew to risk, the pilot would have an either harder time I would bet because he would not be be able to judge pitch and roll of the sea.

WARNING- AMATEUR OPINION

Could a UAV, by virtue of lack of human meat contained within, not also potentially sustain (contingent upon engineering) a much 'harder' landing (in turns of Gs) than a manned aircraft? Or am I right out of 'er?

 

[George Wallace]

WARNING- AMATEUR OPINION

Could a UAV, by virtue of lack of human meat contained within, not also potentially sustain (contingent upon engineering) a much 'harder' landing (in turns of Gs) than a manned aircraft? Or am I right out of 'er?

No you are not right out of 'er.  There is no concern with G force in UAVs for the operators. 

As for landings on aircraft carriers, as it is an unmanned vehicle I am sure the landing procedures can be am mended to include modifying  the net recovery system (an emergency system already in place) to arrest damaged aircraft landing.  The operator would have less pressure/stress in making landings.  Also, remember, the operator for take off and landing will be on the ship, not halfway around the world.  They would then have a fairly good feel for the sea state.

 

[FoverF]

While a UAV would not have a flight crew to risk, the pilot would have an either harder time I would bet because he would not be be able to judge pitch and roll of the sea.

Of the major ship borne UAV projects currently underway, I believe all of them land autonomously. So there is no operator or pilot involved in manually controlling the aircraft as it lands (normally). 

The (former) J-UCAS platforms, such as the X-47 mentioned above, land autonomously on a runway with no problem.

And the MQ-8B Fire Scout is a currently-deployed rotary-wing UAV, which takes off and lands on frigate/destroyer sized vessels autonomously, with no need for a man in the loop.
http://jaxairnews.jacksonville.com/military/jax-air-news/2011-05-11/story/hsl-42-leads-way-fire-scout-uav

So I don;t see it as being that big of a leap to have fixed wing aircraft land autonomously on a larger vessel.