UK sells all its Harrier jets to ... the USA!

[Clinton Huxley]

Does this include the RAF ones, or just the naval versions?

You mean about being a dog? I read a comment somewhere from some US air-force type who said it couldn't fight and couldn't flee....

I meant sold...

In it's day, the RAF version was a decent ground attack plane, with the benefit of still being operational when conventional airfield were wrecked...

Ah, right - I was talking about the Harriers replacement. I think this sale includes all the UKs Harriers. Still the MoD insists we will have no capability gap - we can just fly...err.....pretend aircraft off....um.....oh, is that the time!

[klr]

Does this include the RAF ones, or just the naval versions?

You mean about being a dog? I read a comment somewhere from some US air-force type who said it couldn't fight and couldn't flee....

I meant sold...

In it's day, the RAF version was a decent ground attack plane, with the benefit of still being operational when conventional airfield were wrecked...

Ah, right - I was talking about the Harriers replacement. I think this sale includes all the UKs Harriers. Still the MoD insists we will have no capability gap - we can just fly...err.....pretend aircraft off....um.....oh, is that the time!

The last Sea Harriers (FA.2 version) were retired in 2006. For the last few years, the Royal Navy used the RAF version (GR.7/GR.9) on the carriers. While a much better attack aircraft (and also better in other ways), they didn't have the same air-to-air capability as the Sea Harriers.

It's only the RAF Harriers that are being sold. Since the US Navy already has more than enough fighter jets, it wouldn't want the Sea Harriers even if they were being offered for sale.

BTW, the F-35 was originally due to enter service in 2012. The ModD based its decisions on things actually going to schedule.

[Clinton Huxley]

Cheers, klr.

"Going to schedule"?? Ha ha ha.

[klr]

Cheers, klr.

"Going to schedule"?? Ha ha ha.

It reminds me of the old ten-year rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Year_Rule

The Ten Year Rule was a British government guideline, first adopted in August 1919, that the armed forces should draft their estimates "on the assumption that the British Empire would not be engaged in any great war during the next ten years".

...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It reminds me of the old ten-year rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Year_Rule

The Ten Year Rule was a British government guideline, first adopted in August 1919, that the armed forces should draft their estimates "on the assumption that the British Empire would not be engaged in any great war during the next ten years".

...

And they did each succeeding year on the same guidelines. Which is why the BEF went to France in 1939 on a Channel ferry.

[klr]

It reminds me of the old ten-year rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Year_Rule

The Ten Year Rule was a British government guideline, first adopted in August 1919, that the armed forces should draft their estimates "on the assumption that the British Empire would not be engaged in any great war during the next ten years".

...

And they did each succeeding year on the same guidelines. Which is why the BEF went to France in 1939 on a Channel ferry.

... and why they came back on fishing boats - if they were lucky.

[Clinton Huxley]

It reminds me of the old ten-year rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Year_Rule

The Ten Year Rule was a British government guideline, first adopted in August 1919, that the armed forces should draft their estimates "on the assumption that the British Empire would not be engaged in any great war during the next ten years".

...

And they did each succeeding year on the same guidelines. Which is why the BEF went to France in 1939 on a Channel ferry.

BEF would have done ok, were it not for the damned Belgians. And the French.

[Clinton Huxley]

It reminds me of the old ten-year rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Year_Rule

The Ten Year Rule was a British government guideline, first adopted in August 1919, that the armed forces should draft their estimates "on the assumption that the British Empire would not be engaged in any great war during the next ten years".

...

And they did each succeeding year on the same guidelines. Which is why the BEF went to France in 1939 on a Channel ferry.

... and why they came back on fishing boats - if they were lucky.

Ah, the glorious victory of Dunkirk...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It reminds me of the old ten-year rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Year_Rule

The Ten Year Rule was a British government guideline, first adopted in August 1919, that the armed forces should draft their estimates "on the assumption that the British Empire would not be engaged in any great war during the next ten years".

...

And they did each succeeding year on the same guidelines. Which is why the BEF went to France in 1939 on a Channel ferry.

BEF would have done ok, were it not for the damned Belgians. And the French.

...and Germans.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Ah, the glorious victory of Dunkirk...

"Wars are not won by successful retreats...unless you're married, of course."

[Clinton Huxley]

Ah, the glorious victory of Dunkirk...

"Wars are not won by successful retreats...unless you're married, of course."

True words, old chap.

[Schneibster]

Does this include the RAF ones, or just the naval versions?

You mean about being a dog? I read a comment somewhere from some US air-force type who said it couldn't fight and couldn't flee....

That's what the ones who can't fly say.

Everyone who flies it says it rox. Read the controversy section in Wikipedia.

[Clinton Huxley]

Does this include the RAF ones, or just the naval versions?

You mean about being a dog? I read a comment somewhere from some US air-force type who said it couldn't fight and couldn't flee....

That's what the ones who can't fly say.

Everyone who flies it says it rox. Read the controversy section in Wikipedia.

I'm not convinced its worth the unit price.

[JimC]

Does this include the RAF ones, or just the naval versions?

You mean about being a dog? I read a comment somewhere from some US air-force type who said it couldn't fight and couldn't flee....

That's what the ones who can't fly say.

Everyone who flies it says it rox. Read the controversy section in Wikipedia.

I'm not convinced its worth the unit price.

It might be worth it for the Yanks if they want to keep a second tier but useful capacity going for longer. Good for close support ground attack against relatively low-tech opposition - fits the US needs quite well, I would have thought...

[Clinton Huxley]

I don't think you need a $150 million 5th generation jet to bomb wedding parties....