Simviation Forum - Favorite Fighter/Bomber

Reply #30 - Jan 28^th, 2007 at 7:10pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 6:45pm:

Chris_F wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 6:19pm:

What advantage does an F-35 have over a Harrier? The same advantage it has over the F-16 and F-18 it's slated to replace (or at least supplant).

So what advantage is that?

It's newer and...

...nope, stuck on any practical advantages (well, mentionable ones anyway...) Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #31 - Jan 29^th, 2007 at 2:20pm

Heathaze Ex Member

Charlie wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 7:10pm:

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 6:45pm:

Chris_F wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 6:19pm:

What advantage does an F-35 have over a Harrier? The same advantage it has over the F-16 and F-18 it's slated to replace (or at least supplant).

So what advantage is that?

It's newer and...

...nope, stuck on any practical advantages (well, mentionable ones anyway...) Grin

It's a joint project with the US? Oh wait, maybe thats not an advantage Tongue

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #32 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 9:21am

Chris_F Offline
Colonel
Insert message here

Posts: 1364

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 6:45pm:

Chris_F wrote on Jan 28^th, 2007 at 6:19pm:

What advantage does an F-35 have over a Harrier? The same advantage it has over the F-16 and F-18 it's slated to replace (or at least supplant).

So what advantage is that?

I guess we'll have to wait and see the first time it's used in armed conflict. I'd say it's the same magnitude advantage the F-22 enjoys over the F-15.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #33 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am

dcunning30 Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender:
Posts: 1612

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #34 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 12:44pm

Woodlouse2002 Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender:
Posts: 12574

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

One could say the same about people jumping at any oppertunity to spit on the A380 because it dares to be bigger than the 747.

Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #35 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 12:59pm

dcunning30 Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender:
Posts: 1612

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 12:44pm:

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

One could say the same about people jumping at any oppertunity to spit on the A380 because it dares to be bigger than the 747.

That's silly. I've already said I like the plane.

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #36 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 1:51pm

Chris_F Offline
Colonel
Insert message here

Posts: 1364

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 12:44pm:

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

One could say the same about people jumping at any oppertunity to spit on the A380 because it dares to be bigger than the 747.

Does this mean you are criticizing the F35 because others criticize the A380?

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #37 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 2:02pm

Woodlouse2002 Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender:
Posts: 12574

Chris_F wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 1:51pm:

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 12:44pm:

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

One could say the same about people jumping at any oppertunity to spit on the A380 because it dares to be bigger than the 747.

Does this mean you are criticizing the F35 because others criticize the A380?

Nope. Never even thought of the two planes together untill Dcunning implied that all our critisisms of the F35 were because it was meant to be replacing the Harrier.

Not that it even is fully replacing the Harriers capabilities.

Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #38 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 3:31pm

dcunning30 Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender:
Posts: 1612

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 2:02pm:

Chris_F wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 1:51pm:

Woodlouse2002 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 12:44pm:

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

One could say the same about people jumping at any oppertunity to spit on the A380 because it dares to be bigger than the 747.

Does this mean you are criticizing the F35 because others criticize the A380?

Nope. Never even thought of the two planes together untill Dcunning implied that all our critisisms of the F35 were because it was meant to be replacing the Harrier.

Not that it even is fully replacing the Harriers capabilities.

Not all.. But the last statement is hillarious! Grin

"naaa, I'm not criticizing the F35 because it might supplant the Harrier. In fact, the brand new F35 STILL can't do everything the 20 year old Harrier can do!" LOL!!!!!!!!!

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #39 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 4:14pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

Well, I'm sure you're well aware that despite our "beloved" Harrier being built in the UK, the Harrier II was a mainly US influenced design. A lot of the F-35's avionics and other parts will be developed and sourced in the UK too, as may well the (potentially very novel flight control system).

We're being critical of reasonably important points (its slight obesity problem), and what really was the backwards step of having to go back to the very primitive system of using a seperate lift fan,a dead weight in any operation not requiring V/STOL..

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #40 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 4:56pm

dcunning30 Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender:
Posts: 1612

Charlie wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 4:14pm:

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 11:32am:

<rolls eyes>

huh, the F35 will supplant the beloved Harrier manufactured in the UK? That is an outrage, must criticize the F35!

<sigh>

Well, I'm sure you're well aware that despite our "beloved" Harrier being built in the UK, the Harrier II was a mainly US influenced design. A lot of the F-35's avionics and other parts will be developed and sourced in the UK too, as may well the (potentially very novel flight control system).

I have no problem with that. In fact, it only makes sense.

Quote:

We're being critical of reasonably important points (its slight obesity problem), and what really was the backwards step of having to go back to the very primitive system of using a seperate lift fan,a dead weight in any operation not requiring V/STOL..

Me thinks Lockheed-Martin should hire you as a consultant!

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #41 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 5:05pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 4:56pm:

Quote:

We're being critical of reasonably important points (its slight obesity problem), and what really was the backwards step of having to go back to the very primitive system of using a seperate lift fan,a dead weight in any operation not requiring V/STOL..

Me thinks Lockheed-Martin should hire you as a consultant!

I'm sure enough other people told them that anyway! Grin

What would have been interesting is if Boeing, instead of the "thing"* it produced, had come up with a "Harrier III" concept. Having said that, maybe BAE's closer ties with Lockheed-Martin would have been a problem.

*fairest way to describe the X-32's looks! Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #42 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 5:21pm

Woodlouse2002 Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender:
Posts: 12574

Charlie wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 5:05pm:

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 4:56pm:

Quote:

We're being critical of reasonably important points (its slight obesity problem), and what really was the backwards step of having to go back to the very primitive system of using a seperate lift fan,a dead weight in any operation not requiring V/STOL..

Me thinks Lockheed-Martin should hire you as a consultant!

I'm sure enough other people told them that anyway! Grin

What would have been interesting is if Boeing, instead of the "thing"* it produced, had come up with a "Harrier III" concept. Having said that, maybe BAE's closer ties with Lockheed-Martin would have been a problem.

*fairest way to describe the X-32's looks! Grin

You never know. We might end up with a Swordfish/Albacore situation.

Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #43 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 5:42pm

dcunning30 Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender:
Posts: 1612

Charlie, after doing some reading, what you called a primitive system appears to actually be fairly advanced. Although the seperate lift fan is dead weight when not in V/STOL mode, it's employment allows it to be able to go supersonic, which the Harrier cannot. It also allows the F35 to take off with a greater payload than the Harrier, and it's scheme allows for cooler air to hit the pavement which reduces wear and tear on the pavement.

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #44 - Jan 31^st, 2007 at 6:13pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

dcunning30 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2007 at 5:42pm:

Charlie, after doing some reading, what you called a primitive system appears to actually be fairly advanced. Although the seperate lift fan is dead weight when not in V/STOL mode, it's employment allows it to be able to go supersonic, which the Harrier cannot.

Which is a shame that the Harrier wasn't allowed to be developed into a supersonic aircraft. Had the P.1154 seen the light of day then maybe Harrier II would have been a little different. Being supersonic isn't everything either. In peacetime its a nuisance, and really, for the roles it is taking in British service, not really important. That's not the US' problem though! Grin

Quote:

It also allows the F35 to take off with a greater payload than the Harrier, and it's scheme allows for cooler air to hit the pavement which reduces wear and tear on the pavement.

Fair point. Really depends on the eventual operation. Whichever way, in the critical (mission wise$) phase of flight, it is a fairly dead weight.

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: