4 Harriers line up to take off from the Ark Royal.MOV

Noisy but brilliant, love hearing the engine power up ready to take off, immense! A great shame that this iconic plane will no longer do this off a Royal Naval Ship. An even bigger shame that it will never fly for the UK again either, unless the government grow a pair and admit their mistake

[@CliSwe]

After a steady diet of Queen Elizabeth Class promotional videos recently, this footage shocks us into realising how really small the Invincible Class were! They performed miracles throughout their service lives. With Queen Elizabeth & Prince of Wales a reassuringly large fact of life, we have the opportunity to view Invincible Class operations through American eyes. They were always amazed that the RN achieved so much with so little: the Invincible Class were a tribute to British ingenuity.

[@BT-kf4kx]

Say what you will but sheer determination takes all

[@napoleonblown-aparte4055]

They were indeed small. They made them small to try and make them less like Aircraft carriers as the government were unwilling to get new large aircraft carriers. So they went for small ones to try and persuade them otherwise.

[@Pincer88]

Still a sight to see. I miss the Harriers and Invincible class. They were a league of their own.

[@deoeers]

That’s how fast they takeoff *without* a catapult. Bloody amazing!

[@iangrubb6470]

My Grandfather worked on the design of the Harrier. This is the perfect tribute to both. Thank you.

[@timlocke8588]

Probably sometime later I worked on the Harrier flight simulator.

[@m4gn3tic82]

He made a very loud jet that he eventually broke the mic in this video

[@rivco5008]

That in 1982 the UK sent 2 small carriers with only 20 Sea Harriers 8,000 miles to take on a land-based air force of about 200 aircraft, and then beat them, was one of the great military achievements of the 20th century imo. I believe Ark Royal was under construction at the time of the Falklands War, but maybe not.

[@dogsnads5634]

She was launched in 1981, but was still under construction. Her sister ship, Invincible, went south. Her other sister, Illustrious, was rapidly completed and sailed south to relieve Invincible and Hermes at wars end.

[@gerardocuevas3330]

hahaha,, fk idiot

[@stevenrobson9480]

Our carriers may be small, but they pack a punch.

[@mongohotline]

@@gerardocuevas3330 Pwned

[@carloscity6625]

AT 0:00 I had just finished watching another video with headphones on full blast ,,,, when I clicked on this video I died

[@kennztube]

Saw a GR 7 during an air display in Newtownards twenty years ago. What a sight and sound, I told my boys they were in for a treat at the end when the Harrier "flew" sidewards down the flightline bowing it's nose to the crowd! Very proud Brit that day.

[@oakpineranch]

I wanna be the last pilot. Longer runway

[@richardoakley8800]

Its a harrier..she don't need a runway

[@leefithian3704]

They’ll just put more ordnance on yours lol

[@RR-us2kp]

Yes. That was unfair for the other pilots

[@AleksanderO-wu8xq]

This plane has vtol

[@allgood6760]

Awesome.. I went on HMS Invincible when it visited down under... a mate of mine was Tactical Radar Operator on HMS Invincible during the Falklands War he didn't know if he was going to live or die?... we have a GR3 Harrier here in NZ in a museum.. thanks from NZ 👍🇳🇿

[@darrenhillman8396]

Ohh, that sound! Particularly when the engine spools down. Sends shivers down my spine. Sadly missed. And a very capable aircraft. 👍🏻

[@Highground19]

The Harrier was retired far too prematurely. By far one of my favourite aircraft and they could’ve kept them going for another few years until the F-35 entered service!

[@thENDweDIE]

No volume warning in title...meh...who needs eardrums anyways!? Video starts @ 4:11 enjoy

[@garchaperez7641]

loveliest machine, ever.

[@oakpineranch]

F- 18 hornets makes them look like toys.

[@StarzzyJJASD]

@@oakpineranch harrier looks way better and go look up the falkland islands war and see what the sea harrier did to the Argentina military

[@deemdoubleu]

You're alright! You're alright, plentry of room, keep going, you're alright, STTOOPPP!!!

[@martinbayliss3868]

Now all we have is the comedy f35. Thanks Blair and Cameron!

[@sensualeye]

Martin Bayliss as an American I apologize for the con our government is pulling on the world with the F-35. 😔

[@johnstevenson1709]

The f35 has had some teething issues but when the are worked out they will be a vast improvement over both the fs2 and the gr7/9's better range sensor's take off weight speed and the rest

[@PenzancePete]

Apology accepted.

[@cosmojairzinho14]

@@PenzancePete ....captain sensualeye 😁😁😁

[@MrMoorkey]

@@johnstevenson1709 Do you mean the F/A2? ...the same F/A2 they put up against F22s in the early 2000s at Red Flag (I believe)...leading to what was rumoured to be embarrassing results for the F22 (somewhat the same as when the F22 met the EF Typhoon on exercise). So yes, they were old, but they were of the same thoroughbred as the Jaguar and Buccaneer. Combat aircraft that were feared the world over, and used to devastating effect. The 35...gives me pause. A ripped off and modified Soviet design passed off as an all American stealth fighter that the Soviets even passed on the design as 'thoroughly problematic and maintenance heavy'.

[@JLTSoft]

Great stuff. I donned my headset and cranked the volume.

[@overbank56]

That are the Loudest engines on a combat jet I've_ever heard. A very unique "whine"

[@overbank56]

@Mf1984 why is that?

[@overbank56]

@Mf1984 wow

[@user-pj3ch8ou2h]

Gosh those Pegasus engines are freaking loud!

[@johnmuliyil8170]

Wow! The Arc Royal!! The sword fish single engine planes that off from the Arc Royal & Torpedoed the mighty BISMARCK, hit the steering & rudder & caused it to go in circles N - NW at 10 knots. KG5 finished her off & sank it.

[@jacksonlam2877]

Should have kept these in storage so that they can now be operated on the QECs At least fill the void before they’ve got the full team of F35s ready

[@Akm72]

They should have continued to operate them until F-35 was ready to maintain skills at the very least, but also to cover the eventuality that we actually needed carrier air-power.

[@pedrinbr0726]

this is very nice !!

[@Aeronaut1975]

What a beatiful sight :)

[@kevin48800]

love the sea harrier done so well in the Falkland's. pity the British didn't keep it and up grade it I think most were sold to India who still use them today. and I watched a documentary on here about an American pilot that bought one. to use in air shows

[@oakpineranch]

USMC use Harriers too.

[@kevin48800]

I wonder why the British stopped using them and the Americans still are

[@FallenPhoenix86]

WE did keep them and we did upgrade them, the models used in the Falklands were FRS.1's, these were replaced around 1993 with the FA.2... essentially a major avionic upgrade, new and vastly more capable radar, new cockpit displays and the ability to fire BVR weapons. We kept the FA2 operational until 2006 when the remaining units transitioned to the G.7/9 (same model in the video) with these themselves being retired in 2010 for budgetary reasons. The Indians ordered the FRS.51 in 1979, basically an FRS.1 set up to fire French missiles instead of Sidewinders. None of out retired Sea Harriers were sold to India, though the Indians were at the time very keen to buy FA2 airframes to replenish their own losses... something to do with us being unwilling to export the Blue Vixen radar to India prevented a deal. What was really criminal about the Sea Harriers retirement was that in 2006 the youngest new build (as opposed to rebuilt FRS1) FA2 airframe was only 8 years old...

[@kevin48800]

fallenphoeix you know your stuff

[@FallenPhoenix86]

Thanks, was very fond of them... missed the chance to fly them due to being born just a couple of years too late.

[@richardstout6364]

Amazing how little of the deck the lead Harrier needs....... guess STOVL has some advantages over cats and traps when it comes to getting aircraft away quick. No raising and lowering of blast deflection, hooking up cat. Etc. Just quick control check and go, wait til turbulence abates and no2 goes etc....

[@paulmarchant9231]

Yup, launch rates are higher , quicker for the attack planes to " form up", no need to turn into the wind, can launch in all weathers and sea conditions ( in South Atlantic , harriers were waiting for the bow of the ship to point above the waves before launch..... That's rough !!!!).

[@garethchalmers8194]

@@paulmarchant9231 They still needed to be into the wind to launch and importantly with a full load. However, as we can see there is no slow down in launching jets. Catapults could and do malfunction and the ramp is less labour intensive.

[@MrTarmonbarry]

Not so much turbulance because the majority of the blast is going to the nozzles to creat the lift for a short takeoff , great feature meaning you can get the aircraft off the deck in quicker numbers

[@RR-us2kp]

Both have their advantages. I think the biggest advantage of a stovl aircraft like harrier compared to catapult launched aircrafts is the minimum crew requirement. It's incredible to see how many people are needed on a nimitz carrier to get one aircraft in the air compared to the few people in these carriers.

[@MrMoorkey]

HMS Illustrious and the Fleet Air Arm's Naval Strike Wing used to hold the record for rapid launch of aircraft from a Carrier. I seem to remember it was eight, in rapid succession, in record time, though time has dulled my memory so this may be different.

[@jaydenbonsu4502]

Long live the harrier

[@ajoudas1967]

Strong and powerful

[@jurgenblick5491]

A beautiful moment in time

[@deniszaskalet1306]

the sounds of the engines sound like a baby screaming

[@canopus101]

Impressive!

[@user-ol1qm9ey7g]

ถ้าเราสามารถสร้างสนามบินให้อยู่บนพื้นดินแต่มีขนาดเท่าเรือบรรทุกเครื่องบินจัดการระบบทุกอย่างบินขึ้นเติมน้ำมันติดอาวุธเราจะลดขนาดของเป้าหมายฝ่ายรัสเซียจะโต้กลับได้ยากโดยธรรมชาติของรัสเซียชุดอุปกรณ์ยังขาดความแม่นยำในการยิงถ้าเราใช้สนามบินขนาดใหญ่รัสเซียคงยิงโดนเราแน่นอน 100% ต้องเป้าหมายมันขนาดใหญ่

[@andyoz1168]

love it!

[@andrewadamson6631]

Love this

[@pwo128]

...and in less than a minute the ship has launched a 4-ship CAP. An American CV would struggle to match that launch time.

[@vader1a]

Looking forward to seeing similar launches on QE and PoW should hopefully launch more than 4 in quick succession.

[@usmc-veteran73-77]

I was in the United States Marine Corps 73-77, loved to watch the Harrier perform it's vertical take off and landings. Semper Fi from an old Marine Sgt.

[@MrMoorkey]

Invincible class has launched 8 in rapid succession before.

[@Manaritzis88]

04:35 nice Tail Decoration

[@northeden8661]

Those were the days.

[@darrylwynwilliams1760]

The Fab Four

[@Muesli711]

Great video. Did the position of each Harrier on takeoff affect the fuel / load they could carry ie the first Harrier with the shortest takeoff had to carry the least? Or it didn't matter?

[@hammi1194]

the first two do not appear to have fuel tanks, the rear two do. whether they were full or empty is speculation but i wpuld suspect they were full cause they had the longer roll

[@Albertkallal]

So, 4 jets launched in 40 seconds? A catapult system takes 3 minutes per jet, so in place of 40 seconds, a catapult takes 12 minutes!. I not been able to find a catapult hookup and launch really much under 3 minutes. I read that they can get this down to 2 minutes. Ok, lets be kind - 2 minutes per cat launch. that is still 8 minutes or 480 seconds vs 40 seconds. That means a ramp system launches jets at 10 times the rate of a catapult system! This means you would require 10 catapult systems on a carrier to achieve the same launch rate as this setup. That's really impressive to see how quickly they launched 4 jets.

[@admiralmallard7500]

It's surprising that a fairly simple method would be rather effective in that regard. Though Catapaults allows for heavier takeoff weight

[@WiseSnake]

I have the volume set to damn near 0 and it's still fucking loud! lol

[@stun1zng267]

Happy 50th 😊

[@n_st_uk_200sokiya6]

Is there no isssue of using smartphone??

[@davidandrews2670]

Shame they retired them but hopefully thier successor will prove just as successful

[@Lesserthannone]

No the Harrier knows what its about, The F 35 is to many things. It has a drive shaft and additional ducted fan to do what the H does with 4 nozzles. The Extra fan and shaft are dead weigh in normal flight. Not So for the H.

[@tinglydingle]

Put a squadron of Harriers against a pair of F-35s. The Harriers would lose.

[@controllerhead47]

Yeah well there won't be any air missions in our day and age, we've killed all of our enemies who have an airforce. Now its about payload delivery and the harrier carries more.

[@tinglydingle]

@@solarcannon5057 Lol by what metric?

[@tinglydingle]

@@solarcannon5057 Didn't answer my question.

[@christophernguyen8083]

What do the big numbers mean? For example the first jet was at the number 3 line, does that mean that it was 300 feet from the ramp of the ship?

[@admiralmallard7500]

I believe they're landing spots for helicopters

[@megamrsoftee]

4:03 if you came to see them take off

[@darban2924]

0:00 stabbed my ears

[@MohitYadav-cq4ud]

India retires these jets 2 years ago

[@engchoontan8483]

What if you sail backwards.? = pivot of aircraft versus airflow top-bottom of ramp = clearing of jump-ramp = bottom of ramp is backwall Up ramp, pitch-slowly(back-down) to horizon+15 Up ramp, aircraft touch airflow from bottom of ramp = ... Same for landing on flat american carriers, sweeping air during landing to = just before edge of deck = ... = on deck after edge of deck = ...

[@davidhudson275]

The war was over by the time these four left the deck Lol.

[@MrMoorkey]

The war ended because the Royal Navy showed up. "We ne'er see our foes but we wish them to stay, They never see us, but wish us away; If they run, why we follow, and run them ashore, For if they won't fight us, what can we do more?"

[@admiralmallard7500]

You realise ramp launching is generally faster than catapaults. No need to hook up etc though Catapaults have their own advantages

[@cosmic4037]

WARNING shippers, EAR DEFENDERS MUST BE WARN WATCHING THIS CLIP ... brings back memories.

[@spreadeagled5654]

Why doesn’t the US Navy carrier/assault ships that operate the AV-8 Harriers have ski-jump decks?

[@daniellastuart3145]

Yes inter service politics the US Marines want navy don't the did not come up with the idea

[@JohnSmith-qn3ob]

video starts at 4:10

[@songwutthapthong2630]

เป็นเรือรบแบบเดียวกัน

[@darrenhudson5503]

Proper fleet air arm ..no raf boys in sight

[@TT-hd3zi]

These are BAE Harrier 2’s, flown by the RAF.

[@darrenhudson5503]

@@TT-hd3zi yep your fight..not sea harriers

[@d0v4n18]

RIP Headphone Users

[@user-ok9jo2rs2x]

ไทยเคยมีครับแต่ลืมแล้ว

[@vinhcantho2364]

What is name ?

[@sebastiaomendonca1477]

AV-8B harrier/Sea Harrier

[@105aviation4]

@@sebastiaomendonca1477 nope, harrier GR9 these aren't McDonell these are British Aerospace. Not sea harriers either, they were retired I believe in 2006.

[@sebastiaomendonca1477]

@@105aviation4 Yeah my bad, you're right

[@105aviation4]

@@sebastiaomendonca1477 no worries!

[@fabianfernandez6023]

4 electrics turbines

[@satriat4995]

Where is HMS ark royal now??

[@admiralmallard7500]

Scrapped sadly

[@xXE4GLEyEXx]

lovely plane... horrible noise :D

[@tomo_ka3040]

i was the 1000th like

[@RR-us2kp]

Once in a lifetime opportunity. I once got that chance too. In a different video of course.

[@gocc505]

Indonesia must be mine this fighter av-8b Harrier is the best 👍👍👏 #respect from Indonesian 👍

[@fabianfernandez6023]

Or oxigen hidrogen turbines

[@saintzeno]

they take off like normal planes but land vertically. hmmm

[@dundonrl]

They can take off vertically as well.

[@richardstout6364]

The rolling take off allows heavier loads to be carried and is more fuel efficient. Vertical recovery is the only option on a deck only 600ft long...........

[@ellepant]

Got to move with the times,the f-35 can do everything the harrier can, is twice as fast and is a stealth aircraft and much much more

[@timlocke8588]

Really? It could not fly slowly with half the thrust down and half forward to do a controlled short field landing with an arrester wire? I bet it has been tried on a carrier I twas certainly done on very short tactical airstrips.

[@michaelprobert4881]

@Patrick Gallagher You mean " .. you're a clever one " rather than " your a clever one "

[@fabianfernandez6023]

4 smaller turbines be better with movement

[@sensualeye]

fabian fernandez gotta be different. Besides tankers are always orbiting.

[@peterferenczy7905]

aircraft carriers are all a waste of money but it's funny that the british ones have ramps

[@fabianfernandez6023]

Vertical up be better

[@Tuconseho]

So damn loud

[@mikethelegend1101]

Earrape

[@MrAlwaysBlue]

Certainly wasted some fuel while waiting to take off

[@Then.72]

MrAlwaysBlue do you like having a pull when watching the EMALS ?

[@sebastiaomendonca1477]

By that logic you can say every aircraft wastes fuel taking off. Dumb comment.

[@MrAlwaysBlue]

@@sebastiaomendonca1477 They taxi for a long time.

[@sebastiaomendonca1477]

@@MrAlwaysBlue so does every other aircraft ever, idling aircraft spend very little fuel

[@Then.72]

MrAlwaysBlue do you like having a pull when watching CATOBAR ?

[@ultralaggerREV1]

Oh, don’t worry, she’s just testing new jets to spy on some lolis

[@jaydenbonsu4502]

So loud

[@michamakarski9878]

Nauczke z wietnama realizuja

[@davidsedlickas8222]

So out dated compared to QE

[@RR-us2kp]

They did they're job well.