Why Britain Never Made Another Harrier Jump Jet | INTEL

[@toddcooper2563]

I'm an American Marine Corps veteran from the 80's and I had the privilege to witness the Harriers first hand. It's easy to be arrogant and praise our F-35 and it definitely needs to be respected, but the British sometimes get neglected for their innovations that the world takes pride in.

[@cliffcampbell8827]

We (Americans) wouldn't be here without them (the British).

[@showme360]

We British too often loose out to big money, and our ideas go off to the USA more often than not.

[@RobPetty622]

As a former US Marine air winger who serviced Ground Support Equipment, I have had the chance to witness the Harrier up very close quite a bit. Nothing is like the high pitched whine of that engine.

[@michael_mouse]

... as a Brit I thank you Sir! (the F-35 is so brilliantly beautiful)

[@direbearcoat7551]

I am also a former Marine from the same time frame. I remember how incredibly capable the Harrier was. I loved watching it in the range in MCAGCC in Twentynine Palms. I'd be standing on the bench, inside of our AMTRAC, with the top open, and watch the Harriers do strafing runs on their targets. The buzzing roar of their canons roaring across the entire landscape and filling the entire sky with that sound was thrilling. I was sad to see it taken out of service.

[@gazzaboo8461]

It was the best at what it did for 40+ years. A proven combat platform, and a milestone in aviation history. One of our best.

[@j.b.2263]

It wasnt proven against much though. But it was a great idea for small carriers.

[@gazzaboo8461]

@@j.b.2263 Really? Extensive combat operations in just about every major conflict since the Falklands. Flown by Britain, the US, Spain and Italy, it fought in both Gulf wars, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Libya, and other parts of Africa, up to attacking ISIS targets. Thousands of bombing missions and reconnaissance sorties. Ground support and ground attack, securing airspace, night and day, land and sea based. What part of proven do you disagree with?

[@karentodd6938]

98% mission success rate in Afghanistan. The best of any jet. Defeated asupersonivpc airforce of top quality Argentine fighters

[@kristophercantu297]

(@@karentodd6938 ) I think the F-15 would definitely disagree with you, it has NEVER lost a plane in any war..

[@j.b.2263]

@@karentodd6938 No. Argentina didnt have top fighters. Whats more they had 3 minutes flying time over the conflict zone, they had no air to air capacity since they where in a sea/ground attack role, they had to carry chaff in there air brake since they had no ecm or flare/chaff deployers, Chile was informing the British when the jets where launched and in which direction which made them easy to intercept. Afghanistan: well a slow flying jet would have an advantage there where its not up against much either was it? It wasnt deployed to any hotspot though.

[@GaryGough]

I’m proud to have flown in a Harrier. It might have just been for 45 minutes but it’s a memory I’ll cherish forever.

[@AlMcpherson79]

how annoyed are you going to be when you realise that at one minute in, the narrator says 'VSTOL' not 'STOVL' or 'VTOL'. (I have never heard of VSTOL, only VTOL and STOVL.)

[@AA-xo9uw]

@@AlMcpherson79 V/STOL was/is commonly used when referencing the Harrier and Harrier II.

[@chriswatts2096]

Vertical short takeoff landing VSTOL?

[@xaviermedda554]

Not for ever my friend, a dead skull is empty.

[@SweetSniper5197]

@@AlMcpherson79 same

[@nicwilson89]

The advances of modern computing can't be understated in this. In the Harrier, you were the computer. In the F35, as that F35 pilot said...it does everything for you. Very useful for a weapons platform. I still love the Harrier, though, seeing it at airshows was always a treat. The amount of skill it took to be able to do the kinds of things the Harrier could do in one was crazy even against the already crazy skills of fighter pilots

[@sumott497]

Ya... you look at the operational losses, not combat, just the operational losses, and you start to realize this jet was more of a danger to itself, than the enemy.

[@peterjackson2625]

Dumping the Harrier is typical of British political and defence decisions, going back to the TSR2. If it's good, abandon it.

[@diollinebranderson6553]

​@@sumott497well that's whats expected when your military far outmatches the enemy. Like in the gulf war, most of the deaths of the coalition were from friendly fires compared to the enemy. Although bad, it's a good sign that shows your military dominance that when you barely lose any troops to the enemy.

[@sumott497]

​@@diollinebranderson6553 Well now when you dig deeper into why the operational losses occurred, and find that many were due to pilot error thats a problem. Combat is nasty, and after flying a jet by yourself for several hours, possibly exhausted from pulling G's, the pilot has to pull his brain back together and manually land a jet that doesn't let you relax. The F-35 will land itself if the pilot is compromised, or not 100% with it. Survivability wise the F-35 will save it's pilot far more readily than the Harrier ever could.

[@diollinebranderson6553]

@@sumott497 well duh. The harrier is ancient at this point

[@Aren-1997]

Still should not have retired the Harrier before we had functioning F35s. And its kinda embarrassing on our part considering the U.S and other nations still operate Harriers when we stopped 10 years ago.....

[@Johnnycdrums]

The U.S. Marines will fly the AV-8B Harrier II until 25'.

[@DOSFS]

Mainly due to budge cut and Harrier's maintance cost so British decided to decommission Harrier early on.

[@russell7852]

The F35 is a joke

[@reserva120]

@@russell7852 what a stupid Sloth ridden statement..

[@jeremytravis360]

And we shouldn't have retired the aircraft carriers that went with them.

[@nitenurse48]

I was a SFN (Specialist Field Nurse) with a Harrier Squadron, the highlight of my RAF career was sitting in the back seat of a training harrier and being introduced to a short take of from a field in Germany. WOW the acceleration was awesome, thrust back into the seat I could hardly move.

[@barriejackson3294]

Not RAF Wegberg, by any chance? I was stationed just down the road in Birgelen and used to watch them lift out of the woods.

[@healer1000040]

I was an SFS, and I did a lot of operations in the back seat of a harrier

[@MrBestyTube]

Incredible aircraft - I spent my time in the RN as a harrier engineer and its capability still astounds me to this day. I took that for granted whilst working on them but in retrospect they were completely revolutionary. A monumental loss for our military!

[@UltraMagaFan]

Too bad its a 60 year old design id love to see them stay.

[@johncrow645]

US MARINES don't fly junk. Their adoption of the Harrier Jump Jet says volumes.....

[@davidbrown2571]

Thank our politicians, as they know best ?

[@jds6206]

The Harrier's "required operational capability" is being met with another airframe. A different airplane. A more capable airplane.

[@graemejc1]

@@jds6206 Yes, love the Harrier, but outdated at this time ...

[@macfunkey]

I think that the engineers responsible for developing the Pegasus engine at Bristol Siddeley (before it was taken over by Rolls-Royce), Gordon Lewis and Stanley Hooker, should have been mentioned. Two men my father admired.

[@MayimHastings]

The Harrier has always been my favorite! That was a tremendous step in aviation and the Brits should be well proud of it! Lovely aircraft. Great job with this video, too! 👏

[@bikersoncall]

Best Flying Machine ever invented, shame they used so much fuel, they could probably fix that eventually.

[@patrickingalls5954]

Worked on the Harriers 1978-1982, VMA542, Cherrypoint, N.Carolina. Flightline/ Powerplants. Never got tired of seeing them fly. Amazing machines!

[@halbennett4491]

VMA-231 and VMAT-203 '79-86. Few of these folks know what they're talking about...

[@patrickingalls5954]

@@halbennett4491 I heard they combined 542 and 231 into one squadron. Always wanted to get my back seat license on the trainers. Never got the chance. Nice to hear from a fellow Cherrypointer! Semper Fi Marine!

[@Barron5362]

Me too... 1978-1982, VMA542, Cherrypoint, N.Carolina. Avionics. Got out in '82. Semper Fi !!

[@patrickingalls5954]

@@Barron5362 Hey man! Good to hear from a fellow 542 alumni 😀 We kicked ass didn't we! Remember getting banned from going back to Puerto Rico! Semper Fi brother.

[@chrisasdn6637]

As a Falklands veteran its always nice to see my old ship (Hms Hermes). I have one photo and, in it you can count 30 harriers parked.

[@pushkarironside8911]

My father served on board INS Viraat (rechristened name when it was sold to India) and was proficient on the Pegasus engine. A beautiful aircraft I must say. A beautiful ship too

[@nimaiiikun]

if it wasnt for politicians, maybe Britain could have continued with CTOL carriers and Argentina wouldnt have even tried the Falklands

[@stephenip3265]

@@pushkarironside8911 aaaa

[@raywhitehead730]

I have had others argue that it couldn't operate that many Barriers thanks for documenting it. In a video I remember a RAF pilot mentioning 31.

[@josedro]

Do not forget that the harrier air superiority against the Argentine air fleet was only due to the 200 US missile AIM-9 Sidewnider. Ronald Reagan speed up its delivery as the war started.

[@AlexanderDaiboch]

I know it's been almost 2 years since you've made this but I gotta say, amazing video! Proffesional, interesting, and all around high quality stuff.

[@louferrao2044]

I spent time with the British Army of the Rhein and the Royal Air Force in northern Germany. As an American soldier, I can tell you how comforting it was to know that a call away our air support was coming from the RAF Harriers. I have nothing but respect and admiration what the British accomplished with that plane. Now, the F-35 on board the QE class carriers will make a formidable adversary to any aggressor Navy.

[@TheJTcreate]

Well said.

[@cybertea2639]

well, the f-35 is a pretty good plane but it doesn’t even nearly reach the level of speed or armament of russian jets. Yes, it is stealth, but the new Su-57 is also stealth. Also the f-35 is extremely expensive and hard to maintain

[@cybertea2639]

@Рамис Карама ig but then isn’t the whole point of carriers being able to strike quickly anywhere on the globe?

[@louferrao2044]

@Рамис Карама Let's hope we never have to test your theory.

[@chrisasdn6637]

As a Falklands veteran its always nice to see my old ship (Hms Hermes). I have one photo and, in it you can count 30 harriers parked.

[@Badgersj]

A rather grand friend had a house right next to their testing airfield. You'd be in the garden, having tea, and one of these things would slowly rise above the trees, almost at the bottom of the garden. She said she loved watching them. They were very noisy, but wonderful to watch.

[@Harry-xu2yn]

Imagine sitting in your garden looking at your treetops and watching one of these rise up from behind staring you down

[@homelessswede9675]

this is the most british thing i've ever had the pleasure of reading

[@raymondcpl]

Hahaha.. The pilot wanted to see what cream cakes was on the tea-table!!!

[@ЕгорДавиденко-б4ь]

You use clever words, but you remain stupid.

[@vitaliyjuterbog8912]

@@Harry-xu2yn "Hey Kids, wanna buy some freedom?" the Harrier would say.

[@peterhenson4048]

This was and still is an incredibly fantastic achievement and forever will be, the lads and lasses who worked and flew on this incredible aircraft were amazing.

[@brahmburgers]

Well crafted video, thanks. Engineers don't get enough credit for the incredible feats they accomplish.

[@mikek9297]

And politicians don't get enough shit for the endless dissapointments they provide.

[@greenmarine5]

Yes Engineers deserve credit, but they also deserve ridicule for their either impossible feats on paper or the insane capitol it costs to build their Idea's and they always leave KISS on the back burner which always ends up being their own demise...unless of course you work for a U.S. Auto maker then hell WTF just pass the faults onto the American consumer.

[@datsuntoyy]

What feats? Killing pilots or bragging rights for being able to take off from a very short runway with an almost unappreciable weapons load?

[@Jangocat]

I saw these at air shows in the 80's very impressive jets. They'd come to a dead stop in front of the audience, backup, rotate, bow, then exit at full throttle.

[@l353a1]

I think you should mention the NOISE theses things made! :-)

[@adeborrelli5106]

@@l353a1 I was a sea cadet on HMS Hermes when the first trial landing happened. We had ear plugs and ear defenders and it was still ear shattering.

[@christophersmith4897]

I was stationed at a small US army airfield near Mainz in Germany when the British Harrier display team came to show off on a German Sunday morning variety program. They parked them on our ramp for the night and then gave us a little show while they warmed up for the German TV show. They were screaming loud and didn't do our tarmac much good. lol. But it was awesome to watch them just hang in the air. The ability of the display pilots was amazing as well. one trick was them in a circle nose in and then to rotate like a wagon wheel. The precision was amazing even for a bunch of helicopter people.

[@nationalistcanuck7800]

@@christophersmith4897 The Soviets used to laugh at those things, and how unstable they were. Those very same Soviets laugh every time they remembered the Harrier was produced from Soviet designs sold to Britain. The Soviets felt the planes were useless.

[@christophersmith4897]

@@nationalistcanuck7800; They were not optimized for a fight against air superiority fighters. They came into their own when the Marines figured out they were perfect for the Ground Support, escort, and Close Air Support role deployed on the Marine Amphibious assault Ships. That gave the Marines an advantage as the Soviet block never really had a answer to them.

[@martinburke362]

When Britain first made the harrier in the 60s we where a manufacturing nation now we couldn't manufacture a paper bag!!! The British aircraft industry is on its knee's

[@ddha0000]

i mean, the UK is still very big in aviation production.

[@martinburke362]

@@ddha0000 we have rolls royce we build wings for airbus we gave away our helicopter industry to the Italians we do not have the capacity to build and indigenous combat aircraft of our own nor a passenger aircraft of our own we've pulled out of the jet trainer market we build good radars and weapons systems if i was a teacher i would say this child has potential must apply himself and do better

[@TheByard]

We need paper bags more than the plastic ones. and with most decisions it's the politicians that cock it up and a few years later move on.

[@reubenwills9757]

@@martinburke362 Whats tempest then you moron?

[@theyoutubeguy1]

Go start an aircraft manufacturing business then....

[@morganhale3434]

I have been to airshows in the US with Marine crewed Harriers, remarkable planes and a lot bigger in person than it appears on the screen or in photographs. I've seen them being flown backwards over the waters of Lake Washington which is mind blowing.

[@perperson199]

This channel is brilliant. The Harrier is a legend. I was sad when it went

[@ryszardsokolowski1999]

Let's be ownest. Harrier is a legend because that airplane never took part in the war against capable enemy.

[@jawarakf]

@@ryszardsokolowski1999 there's F-35B now, the harrier is obsolete and useless. Harrier only scored kills from world's first all aspect AIM-9L with high hit percentage.

[@gonzomuse]

@@ryszardsokolowski1999 There hasn't been a properly symmetrical conflict since WWII. The Harrier proved itself in the Falklands. 21 jets down, NO loses against allegedly "better" fighters (A-4 Skyhawks, IAI Daggers Super Etendards and Mirage IIIs) and it is still a capable aircraft with capabilities unavailable to the majority of countries. The Harrier is a proven effective combat aircraft.

[@gusgone4527]

@@ryszardsokolowski1999 The Sea Harrier was an afterthought for air defence of small carriers.. The original Harrier idea was always to be a close support/ground attack aircraft, able to deploy close to the front line where it was needed. If the The Hawker Siddeley P.1154 had been developed to production versions. The future of all combat aircraft would have changed, particularly naval aviation.

[@jawarakf]

@@gonzomuse those kills were made by AIM-9L, world's first all aspect IR guided air to air missiles. Argentine fighters are old and lacked head on engagement missiles, only rear aspect old magic missiles. If British didn't force French to reveal weakness of Exocet anti-ship missile, the entire British fleet would have lost. Mind you that Argentina was being placed on embargo by American government leaving most of Argentine aircraft grounded due to no parts. If Soviet Union had access to sell weapons to Argentina, things would have been different and harriers will be in trouble.

[@Glee73]

my first time ever seeing a harrier for real was somewhere in the UK, around 1984 i believe.. it flew right over the highway at pretty low level and we were in a car. i was 12, can still remember it clearly.

[@nerdybritishkoala3697]

The Harrier is one amazing piece of engineering

[@Sgt_Bill_T_Co]

I thoroughly enjoyed my role in the design team (avionics) working on the frequency hopping radar for this beautiful machine, First aircraft to fly backwards since the tiger moth in a gale!

[@KondorDCS]

What practical use does being able to fly backwards in a real battle have?

[@jasont2610]

@@KondorDCS I think being able to fly backwards might be useful landing on a carrier in high winds.

[@kevinomalley6517]

@@KondorDCS The ability to fly backwards means that its stall speed was minus 70mph. When fighters get into a tight turning knife fight, they approach their own stall speeds. The Harrier has no stall speed. Its ability to Vector In Forward Flight [VIFF] very quickly alongside its heavy wing loading & small size was what led to it having the 2nd highest air-to-air battle kill ratio behind the F15. And you can't land an F15 on a cargo ship.

[@AA-xo9uw]

@@kevinomalley6517 Yet as the following video shows when the nozzles are rotated fully down in flight the aircraft will in fact stall. kzbin.info/www/bejne/boaoapxuZ7CWlbs

[@casperslaststandme5991]

I've had some very sad arguement's with my son connected with this subject, he seems to have been taught that the UK has nothing whatso ever to be proud of in our history, I've try to inform him of the wonderful engineering skills and imagination we had that brought the likes of the spitfire, hurricane, typhoon, mosquito, Lancaster, meteor, Canberra, vulcan, Victor, valiant, lightning, tsr2, harrier, buccaneer, concord etc etc etc etc etc, and this was just one particular industry, but it means nothing to him, there are many politicians that deserved to locked up and the key thrown away, not just for allowing it to happen but actively taking part in the demise of the UK's reputation.

[@Showloveclothing]

Sorry to say this but, you're sons a leftie.

[@casperslaststandme5991]

@@Showloveclothing ohh Hell yes, im not taking offence, it is what it is, he thinks he's a liberal but doesn't understand how far the left has moved over to the left, he thinks I'm far right and doesn't even acknowledge that there might be a right of center, a right, or even a genuine center as i would understand it, the fact that i have voted both labour and conservative in the past means nothing, I've already been judged, it started when he returned from uni and slowly got worst I'm afraid, I'm sure he will level off to some degree as he gets older but i have to admit i begrudge the possibility of losing these years to what seems to me a far left ideology that prevails at this time, and the real burn is he is so damned clever in the book sense, its the wisdom that is missing unfortunately I'm afraid.

[@Hurricane2k8]

@@casperslaststandme5991 Well, there are certain things that really shine in the history of the UK, such as kicking off industrialisation. That being said, I have noticed that the UK in general hasn't bothered critically reflecting their past. Even today there is a significant amount of people glorifying "The Empire", i.e. brutal colonial oppression of people around the world. I don't think your son is "far left". You, on the other hand, suggest "locking up politicians and throwing the key away". I know this is not meant to be taken literally, but think about what you're really suggesting here.

[@phantomechelon3628]

Don't stop trying! British engineers, scientists and inventors pretty much laid the foundations of the modern world...we were the first industrialised nation after all. It is a crying shame that successive governments have allowed (or forced) the atrophy of our defence industry to the point that the only thing we do entirely ourselves is building warships. It is embarrassing that we're now reliant on the US to provide aircraft for the RAF and Royal Navy...at least until / unless the Tempest project is given the green light.

[@casperslaststandme5991]

@@Hurricane2k8 hello there hurricane, firstly let me thank you for a reasoned and thoughtful reply :), yes the lock them up and throw away the key was a somewhat tounge in cheek remark, and yes the days of empire and colonialism are of course long past, but should we judge them by todays standards and if we do are we to do so on an impartial manner ?, there were many knock on benifits that country's like india gained from that time, hence the fact they are more advance by todays standards than others having been left a huge amount of infrastructure, a high price to pay of course but still a benifit denied to other colonies of other countrys one might say, your point about our own industrial revolution can also be viewed on the other side of the coin as it were, there was a huge amount of suffering caused by that time period, the working class at that time would be considered as virtual slaves by todays standards, but benifits also came from it, not just national economical benifits of course but child labour laws, security of housing health care charitable aid and many others, and many if these lessons were exported also, we tend to look on the bright side of things out of self preservation of course, its, human nature, one of the worst of the colonies of course was that of the Belgium congo, but Germany, the Dutch, France, spain, portugal, Italy, Japan, China, the USA to some extent although carried out in a somewhat different manner, the Soviet Union, the Arabs caliphates and many many others all indulged in this practise, i think it is the fact that the UK seems to be the go to empire to beat someone on the head without acknowledging the many others that gets peoples backs up in this regard that makes them wish to defend the past when thats what it should be regarded as, the past, as i tell my kids 'all that is old is not. Necessarily bad all that is new s not Necessarily good' :).

[@oddball1959]

Getting rid of it was a disgrace. As a Falklands Vet I have a great memories of what they did for us.

[@SamanthaGuttesen]

Absolutely. The most disgusting thing was that the Harrier had just had an upgrade and would have been able to serve the Raf for many years to come. But the pen pushers, decided to save a few quid. And, I remember the press conference given by Cameron. Wrong on so many levels. The entire harrier fleet, was sold to America, for the price of one airframe apparently. If so, that's not exactly good business.

[@chrometutor-tipstricksandt9427]

Lol, the harrier only destroyed a few Argentine jets.

[@thespoderdoge4757]

@@chrometutor-tipstricksandt9427 and what was the k/d ratio hm?

[@DashDriver-z1r]

ChromeTutor! - Tips, tricks, and tutorials 21 and we only had 20 harriers

[@memy964]

@@SamanthaGuttesen ..Typically the UK, Cameron is all about the money in the bank, never about National heritage. We could have Licensed the technology to the states, and had something back, but, typical UK Politicians, sold us out, again ...

[@Quebecoisegal]

I watched one of these at an air show. The noise was incredible, it was spell binding, and I wish that I had been able to take a movie. Once seen, never forgotten.

[@NVRAMboi]

It's not possible to minimize the Harrier's significance in military aviation history. It is and will always be an iconic legend.

[@myririmyri6639]

The answer: Its complicated The actual answer: Mismanagement of the country by politicians.

[@CathDamienn1776]

Same answer why its still malfunctioning today lmfao

[@ZacLowing]

Not really. If you watch the video you'd see there was no way to rework the harrier, 11:09

[@colinp2238]

You have to take in progress as a factor - the World does not stand still but sometimes people do.

[@knoahbody69]

It's not the 60's, or even the 80's, Lockheed spent billions developing it. Also the amount of tech is amazing. As you can see in the video the VTOL was the complicated part.

[@giantape6465]

Very original comment, almost like the original has 1k likes on the exact same video you’re commenting on?

[@peterbradshaw8018]

Love the talks from the folk involved in designing it.

[@p24hrsmith]

I've watched a few programs about the Harrier and many of the pilots who flew them said it wasn't just about vertical takeoff and landing it was what you could do with it in mid-air combat that made it so good. It could do things no other aircraft could and still to this day can't do which gave it a big advantage in a dog fight so it's a sadly missed aircraft

[@BipoIarbear]

@David Ogborn the troops i knew who served in the Falklands all legend para engineers of 9 squadron like proper heros us young lads looked up to all having the same stories , and later on you tube the Argentinians were scared so much of the jets so much , like any jet noise they would duck instantly, not as much in my day but my mate who's dad was an sbs photographer told me "he was scottish" told us of the day he truly knew about his dad's war days cos of the mountain run all the jets through 2 went by an my mate said his dad just disappeared, he had gone to ground behind a rock , I don't know why I think of it so often , it was the screams of the jets which thankfully I never encountered the front end of , but I'm still aware of it an im frightened

[@pulsey2001]

@David Ogborn Thank you for the history lesson 👍

[@AA-xo9uw]

VIFFing was a technique first demonstrated by then Marine Corps Captain Harry Blot in 1970. The technique was/is part of the Marine Corps' training syllabus for Harrier/Harrier II pilots as their Harriers were equipped with air-to-air missiles from the get go. Not so with the Brits. When the nozzles are rotated the jet doesn't simply stop in mid air. The nose pitches down and lift is rapidly lost causing the aircraft to roll. kzbin.info/www/bejne/boaoapxuZ7CWlbs

[@fireman1468]

Yep they still don't have a heat seeking missile that will go sideways!

[@ChemiiOneLegacy]

It saddens me what a great mess British Engineering has become. It feels like the government and private companies have soaked up and sold off everything my countrymen ever created. As an island we produce almost nothing anymore. Tragic really.

[@P888JAC]

Money money money is a rich government’s world ....Why would British government buy into it ? They now just tag onto the big boys and fly low. The British now are second class at the moment in innovation, technology and intuition, we now follow everybody else. So sad so sad

[@joewoodland8635]

@@P888JAC there are some interesting combat philosophies in the works, especially for the challenger 3's ability to deploy small combat drones. (we are going to be going full Tau) What is sad is we are leaving behind the Hercules for the Airbus Atlas and that will cost us even more military engineering jobs in this country, while providing a tool that isn't best suited for either of the two very different jobs we are going to give it.

[@P888JAC]

@@joewoodland8635 We need good government to install the greatness we had when all groups were hand in hand..RR ..LOCKHEED. Etc NOT SO MUCH BAE but they are still up there (don’t know why) We got two massive carriers with no British planes contracted to USA I think we lost the plot giving it all away Britain lost out because politics gave away all of the control we had for a few bucks in advance

[@fredorico41]

Sounds like Australia 🇦🇺

[@astr0jack440]

Fish n chips, and... uhh tea, lots of tea

[@dapsapsrp]

The Harrier is one of my all time favorite air show aircraft. It does things no other aircraft does. The US Marines love it, used it extensively in Desert Storm and still use it in limited numbers today. Several years ago the US government purchased the UK's remaining fleet of Harriers to extend the use of them and replace those worn out in USMC service. I remember my dad, who worked at McDonnell Douglas, the US builder of the AV-8B, rave about the aircraft. They were proud to be building it.

[@AA-xo9uw]

All of the UK Harrier IIs purchased by the Marine Corps are being used for spare parts. None remain flying.

[@thetessellater9163]

My first ten years of life were living on RAF bases, as my father was an airman, and though aircraft were taking off and landing 24/7 just yards from where we lived in some locations, you get used to it. I still feel a pervasive sense of nostalgia. (Miss you, Dad)

[@----.__]

You get so used to the noise that living in suburbia with it's relative silence makes it almost impossible to get to sleep! It took me a few days to adjust when I enlisted, but it took me weeks to adjust when I got out.

[@jameseunice4801]

I understand. From age 3 to age 6, I was in a SAC B-52 base--B-52 's and KC 135 tankers everywhere.

[@juntingiee2602]

sorry for your loss :(

[@stevevisscher1350]

A very well produced and informative presentation. I had the pleasure of interviewing Billie Flynn a few years back when he was here in Australia on a PR tour for the F-35A. A very knowledgeable man, and passionate advocate for this platform.

[@bagas_akbar]

I love how KZbin recommended me this after I know War Thunder New Update gonna add the Harrier

[@ahmadhashhash1331]

same here lol . Can`t wait to have some memes with it .

[@PJSCode69]

I wanna hover over 2s6 and drop bombs Lmfaoo

[@Tank_Driver4822]

Also same here

[@epicflight0014]

New (Over)Power

[@ikbenhesmientie163]

Well the reason is KZbin finds you watching videos with the Harrier as titel and gives you more. Its pretty funny tho i also agree.

[@potdog1000]

i served with the Harrier force in Germany in the 70s & it was a brilliant aircraft, revolutionary concept of co-ordination with ground troops

[@seanjoseph8637]

I was on 3(f) at Gut, mid to late 80's. 13 field deployments done.

[@potdog1000]

@@seanjoseph8637 i was at Wildenrath 73 /76 my sister was at gut in 83 i think

[@scottgordon1781]

Takes me back to 71 I think. Laarbruch , others went to Gut. and Wildenrath. We were all CCF Air Cadets on camp . On arrival at ATC were told , 'Sorry , its boring today , too much low cloud :-( ' Seconds later were told ,' hold on have a Harrier coming in '. Shortly after joined by 4 others , no idea where they came from . They hovered all over the airfield , almost a 'ballet ' , then one by one , flew off into the clouds .

[@seanjoseph8637]

@@potdog1000 Do you know John Lamonby?

[@potdog1000]

@@seanjoseph8637 name doesnt ring a bell but that soesnt mean a lot as i might have donr by sight, i was there from 73-76 Tactical Supply/stores

[@bloodswettears234]

All very good. Just shows how good Harrier pilot's were and are.

[@paulchristopher6659]

What a fabulous engineered unit. I used to watch them flying and pretend landing at Bournemouth Airport. They always gave a 'nod' to the tower upon completion. We still are a great engineering country and when needs must will turn up trumps when needed.

[@Nancy-yz9eb]

Ill never forget my first glimpse of a harrier in early 1982 while stationed at USMCAS Cherry Point North Carolina. It was exciting to watch them in action nearly every day.

[@Querencias7]

Such a BEAUTIFUL and FORMIDABLE fighter. Iconic indeed, legendary for those of us that appreciated its virtues. Many thanks for the video ... and the memories.

[@Danny-zi6xw]

Damn I wish we still had the Harrier, such a bloody good aircraft

[@EricTViking]

@Izno Iznogoud Falklands campaign proves you wrong.

[@suhandatanker]

@Izno Iznogoud nobody ever died in a harrier since the falkland war lmao

[@user-le3wk3it7v]

@1:06 don't look at the graphics, look at the rest of the frame. I LOVE IT!

[@granddukeofmecklenburg]

@@EricTViking it shot down 25 A-4 and Super Etendard attack aircraft, 1 cargo plane, 1 cessna, and 1(only 1) fighter...a Mirage that fell into the harriers airspace after a highspeed stall causing a flatspin...The harriers only advantage was its STOVL...its performance was Mundane, even in the 80s

[@granddukeofmecklenburg]

@@EricTViking If anything the Falklands proved the issues with the tiny Invincible ski slope boats...And that Ark Royal with Real Fighters couldve saved alot of lives, as the harrier never managed to actually protect the airspace, which it was rather poor at, in response and intercept times...

[@Jabberstax]

Unfortunately we've stopped investing in design and manufacturing here in the UK.

[@Daveyboy1066]

We still do a lot of design but manufacturing is comparatively non existant!

[@Geoffreytomlinson24]

I remember driving to a TRADA site at Princess Risborough in the late 60's early 70,s and stopping at some remote traffic signals down a country lane. thinking they were not working I edged forward, one of these monsters took off next to me in the woods. A memory that stays with me now.

[@tanchiiann4237]

This used to be the fighter I like most during my childhood.

[@SiliconBong]

*remember opening up a box of WeetBix and seeing a card with a harrier on it, fell in love with all things aerodynamic in a second.

[@samfallow18]

I consider myself very fortunate to have witnessed a Harrier demonstration at Donnington Park some years ago. It was awesome in the truest sense of the word. I had goosebumps and tears in my eyes as it hovered for one last ime, dipped it's nose then disappeared over the horizon.

[@TStark-vj2wo]

love the mix of a model kit Harrier on strings with thrust animations added. Great!

[@AUTOSHOT988]

I built a 125 engineering team at Hawker Sidley in 60's and then 20 eng for USA company to support US Marines.

[@joethomas5528]

It's one of my favourite planes, and nothing will change that. the harrier is just amazing, and looks like something out of a scifi movie

[@alganhar1]

You know, when I was a kid I used to watch BFBS..... 4 hours a day, 2 in the morning, 2 in the evening. For those who are wondering, it was the British Forces Broadcasting Service, and back in those days before Sat TV and Internet, it was the only English Language TV for troops and service families living in bases around the world.

[@stephenbarrette610]

Very interesting and brilliantly made film on the Harrier. As a kid in the sixties, I remember building an Airfix model kit of the P.1127 which was the forerunner to the Harrier. And the thrill of seeing one at Southend Air Show many years ago. Hovering over the sea, moving backwards, tilting slightly up and then bang - it seemed like it just shot up in a second. Awesome, and it scared the hell out of my six year old with the noise!

[@andrewjohn1180]

Beautiful plane ...I remember when my dad was stationed at RAF Wittering. He picked me up from school one day and we took a short cut across the airfield.front of us. Absolutely amazing. 👍🇬🇧🇬🇧

[@kevinhoughton9134]

Memories, Brian Hanrahan counting them out and counting them all back in again!!

[@saxx001]

We still miss it here at its home in Wittering, Cambridgeshire.

[@lmklmk1512]

I saw these at air shows in the 80's very impressive jets. They'd come to a dead stop in front of the audience, backup, rotate, bow, then exit at full throttle.

[@canihavesome2591]

Noisy bloody things tearing down the welland valley !! Ejoyed watching them tho as a kid.....

[@jerrydowse5061]

Spent 6 happy years based at Wittering in the 80s.

[@swingmanic]

One of these crashed in the field at the back of my house just prior to me moving to Australia in 1999 (ZD345) when I lived near Fosdyke in Lincolnshire. They were clearing off the top soil for a week, meanwhile a Canberra was flying overhead for a couple of days taking reconnaissance pictures.

[@chrisvig123]

Unfortunately one of their weaknesses they were difficult to land and take off…many of them crashed 😮

[@black5f]

The UK owned aircraft development. Tornado, Jaguar, Harrier. TSR2. Cold war jets designed to take off from farm yards, self starting, robust, low maintenance and intercept the enemy within 3 minutes. I remember Harriers round here stationed in small forest clearings. Quite unique.

[@WillSmith-qk1be]

if only the tsr2 could have made it into production. it was incredible.

[@eugeneoreilly9356]

The Jaguar was a collaboration with France with SNECMA producing the engines.The Tornado was a joint effort with France,Germany,Italy with only the engines supplied by RR.The Harrier and TSR2 was all British.

[@MrAnonymousRandom]

The UK fell short when it came to ironing out glitches and selling their aircraft. The DeHavilland Comet is a perfect example. Not having the biggest military budget and financial constraints also didn't help.

[@waltersansom127]

British labour party in government cancelled TSR2 on request of Russia.

[@jimgreene951]

@@waltersansom127 Blatantly not true , USA scuppered deal & offered F111 as replacement, which would've cost more than whole TSR2 programme !

[@Twirlyhead]

At 14:57 - I realise my analogy here may be a stretch for some but here it is. This guy's point reminds me of when I was learning computer programming at University. Our tutor had us spend two weeks of familiarisation exercises on the editor software we were using. The logic was that when we got to programming we should be thinking only of the program and not about the mechanics of typing, editing, saving, etc, etc. Given the limits of the human mind and body, and the advantages in being able to focus fully on the mission what this chap is saying can only be a very good thing.

[@zippy5131]

I spent 4 years on IV(AC) Squadron the best years of my life, I've worked on Tornado, Hawk, Typhoon as well. There is only one plane that I fell in love with the GR7... The best..

[@seanjoseph8637]

At Cottesmore?

[@zippy5131]

@@seanjoseph8637 Yes mate on IV (AC).. 2001

[@seanjoseph8637]

@@zippy5131 My last tour was there in the Hyd bay, still live locally. It is now Kendrew Barracks and full of squadies.

[@zippy5131]

@@seanjoseph8637 So you'd probably know Paul Coombes. Used to go fishing with him for the Station.

[@seanjoseph8637]

@@zippy5131Aye I know Paul, I haven't seen him for a long time though. I remember he used to disappear to do his fishing, I think he even went to the states on an exped. I'm pretty sure you and I know each other by sight at least.

[@kyledabearsfan]

Great video, cheers from the US. Amazing airplane, it really captured my imagination as a kid. Have to appreciate the incredible brilliance of our British allies.

[@Frserthegreenengine]

Answer: "It's complicated" Short answer: "Politicians!"

[@andrewmccallum5699]

Right answer should have been ask the ppl who are supported on the ground and sea by those Harriers. Think there's too many short sighted decisions being made / at the expense of the bigger picture and short/medium/long term future... the Harrier proposition gave NATO an excellent fighter-bomber ideally suited for air to air / air to ground combat, too many "higher ups" have said the cold war is over, quoting a Norwegian military officer who said "Norway gave away one of their best bases" re submarine naval base, Russia is just asleep / like a bear... never know when it will wake up. Short answer - should have not put all the eggs in one basket, the UK could still buy back the Harriers, refit / refurbish or modernise them, or even build a newer version (cheaper, modern version of a Harrier could give the UK and NATO a cheaper VTOL fighter bomber ideal for the future, mix in stealth capable advanced fighters with a cheaper fighter-bomber - could and should be considered, plus a Harrier type aircraft could be flown from a UK carrier or even landing assault ship or even a cargo ship (Falklands...) Long answer - PM can happily spend x amount on a "brexit" paint job... ask straight question about true military investment ... not seen it answered yet

[@thesirmaddog8209]

@@andrewmccallum5699 LOL... Change is the ONLY thing you can rely on... STOP living in the Past

[@richardwales9674]

@@thesirmaddog8209 Why's he living in the past? Look at what the US Marines are doing and explain that please. Current thinking is to go back to propeller driven aircraft for counter insurgency work...

[@hanzo8120]

@@richardwales9674 Mhh I read somewhere that the US Marines get the F-35 VTOL Version. So even the Marines will replace there Harriers with new, fancy, shining -Toys- Planes.

[@richardwales9674]

@@hanzo8120 Will; as in haven't yet. Last I heard the Marines had decided to extend the life of the Harrier. Someone higher up has mentioned 2023. Ours have been gone for ten years and we've had aircraft carriers we couldn't fly planes off. We've already shot our bolt and the US Marines are keeping an open mind.

[@harryzero1566]

My closest experience with a harrier, was sitting at traffic light with a harrier hovering above my window in the roof of my car. The sensation of being squashed into the road surface was amazing. No fear, just a sense of wonderment.

[@eugene9661]

I never knew it has so many short comings. Thanks.

[@grahammills4762]

Back in the 60s I had an amazing job working with RollsRoyce who were developing the Pegasus engine originally used in the Hawker Siddley P1127 jump jet. The original vectored thrust engine was not quite powerful enough and was considerably upgraded and modified to gain almost 30% more power.

[@RobWhittlestone]

I love this aircraft. I worked on the BITE of the FADEC in 1983-1984. I think it was the GR4. We need to revive the British aviation industry.

[@skylongskylong1982]

I remember when the Fleet Air Arm retired the Sea Harrier, they were contacted by USAFE at RAF Lakenheath. They paid for the Sea Harriers,to spend a fortnight dog fighting F 15 aircraft, at low level. A good swan song for a great aircraft.

[@covak2002]

I did a detachment to Lakenheath way back and we took a load of Harriers up there proper great detachment that was way before they retired though

[@rutherfojr]

All a waste of money. Stealth drones supersonic drones even multiple warhead cruise missiles just around the corner. Carriers like the queen Elizabeth could be changed to handle this tech. Imagine 20 interceptor drones above the carrier 24 7. And 30 odd strike attack drones in a in a high te soon theatre. F35 It's the last big combat aircraft project.ANOTHER 10 YEARS it will be obsolete.

[@georgebuller1914]

@@rutherfojr TBH, spending the money we do trying to find more efficient ways to kill each other is ALL a waste of money! BUT - if we are to stay 'free' then we must ensure that we have at least as big a stick as the other guy and, if they're not better, then at least that we have a damn site more of them! :-) Finally, 'just around the corner' means when, in terms of years? :-)

[@rexeverything4578]

@@rutherfojr Why do you believe there's a need for intercept drones near a destroyer or carrier? It'll take quite a few planes launching even more missiles to damage anything of the forward operating vessels afloat today; it'd be like"kamakazi".

[@Foxtrottangoabc]

@@rutherfojr don't really disagree with you, but will add its all about having that marginal edge against your enemy. Especially aviation u cant stand still or your enemy will defeat you, so unfortunately this constant development is necessary i think even if its expensive

[@chembleton]

2:13 River Tyne, my home town South Shields to the right

[@georgemorley1029]

My dad's home, North Shields, to the left!

[@davidcurr6221]

8:00 "eye brow" scared me. Hope I can get over it.

[@philbuglass4857]

@@georgemorley1029 Mine too...

[@VadoVoodoo]

@@georgemorley1029 Howay The Lads!

[@stanbebbington7392]

@@VadoVoodoo pj,p

[@MikePerigo]

1:15 "No air to air losses" Love the careful qualification in that statement. It's probably true that more Harriers were lost in non-combat situations but there were enough losses in the Falklands for it to earn it's reputation as our best 'Underwater Reconnaissance' fighter due to the number that ended up in the ocean. Obviously details were classified at the time but I would love to hear the full story. Were the losses due to design, handling or maintenance problems?

[@johnvienta7622]

Wasn't one put into the Channel after the pilot was apparently showing off to people on the beach. I recall that as the aircraft was hovering and bowing to the crowd, the pilot didn't realise that that water beneath was being dispersed by the downdraft ( or whatever the technical term is ) so effectively it went down into a hole in the water.

[@MikePerigo]

@@johnvienta7622 Interesting concept that I'd never thought of. I had always been led to believe it was due to the limited capability of the water tank used for extra cooling during hover maneuvers.

[@johnvienta7622]

@@MikePerigo , you are probably correct as this was just one incident and I am going from memory as to the reasons given at the inquiry. I would say that they had lots of photos so that probably helped them come to that conclusion. It took me a while to sort it out in my head but it makes sense when you are blasting air at water as opposed to a solid surface.

[@Orcinus1967]

5 shot down by ground fire, 4 lost due to "accidents" in the Faulklands. More info is probably available.

[@LondonSteveLee]

IIRR Two were due to an air to air collision in terrible weather. One was blown another the side of the ship (gailforce winds) and another ran out of fuel - something that nearly happened on several occasions. Obviously there were the loses to ground fire as well.

[@GunnerRA155]

Gerry Anderson would be proud! Great video :)

[@Albertkallal]

With all those cool doors and transformation that the F35 does for vertical landings? I was really looking for two rows of palm trees fall side ways. As the F35 does its rolling takeoff - just like Thunder bird #2 does! Without a doubt, Anderson is smiling to see these Rolls Royce lift fan systems in operation!

[@tooyoungtobeold8756]

@@Albertkallal No, the Harrier flying on strings.

[@intercommerce]

"Transitioning to forward flight" - Thunderbird 1

[@thundertick5666]

@@intercommerce I always used to wonder why he said that. I'd answer, in my head, 'Yes, we know'.

[@firedamaged]

I vividly remember watching a Harrier at an air show when I was a kid. It absolutely blew my mind to see it just suspended in the air. Amazing piece of engineering .

[@HellbellyUK]

Same here. 100m away from a Harrier in a hover. So loud you could feel the sound in your entire body. Just beautiful.

[@csor_1445]

It annoys me how you only have this many subs, this channel is underrated af

[@heyokaikaggen6288]

Serves a useful purpose, tells you exactly how many people are interested in complexity and well-told information.

[@leechgully]

This video seems to have a lot of Dislikes as well which I find perplexing.

[@BaddaBigBoom]

I remember in the mid 70s going past Farnborough Airfield on the school bus and seeing Harriers taxiing and taking of, it was and still is my favourite aircraft of its type.

[@Then.72]

The Bristol Siddeley Pegasus engine which is now the Rolls Royce Pegasus P.1127 engine was the VTOL breakthrough in the 1950s using thrust vectoring and was used in every Harrier from the Hawker Siddeley Kestrel to the McDonnell Douglas AV-8B plus the Pegasus P.1154 was the design for the supersonic version that the Russians stole

[@jon-paulfilkins7820]

How amazing the Harrier is? Consider this, Sir Sydney Camm had a hand in its early work, he started in the Aircraft Industry in WW1! He was also the chief designer of the Hawker Hurricane! That is how fast Aircraft technology advanced in that period. As to what has happened to British Aircraft design, Politicians and BAE is what happened.

[@TiberiusMaximus]

very good job, especially w the graphics. As a career military guy I really love that new carrier you Brits built. Love the glazing and the size of the thing is impressive. I never thought another country would go w a big carrier design again. Most were happy with those Mistral class light carriers

[@myrddrral]

This is why KZbin has taken over. Quality content from creators who care to make something good. Great job.

[@edgarkeisi]

The Harrier is a wonder of British Engineering. The concept and the actual plane were ahead of their time. British never gave themselves the chance to evolve and were to quick in putting aside their home grown achievement. Sadly not the first time. It is not possible to talk about military aviation and not to mention the Harrier. I have my doubts that the F35 will ever achieve the same. Thank you for the video.

[@samgemsgems7571]

Britain made a mistake under thacher government to abondone the suggestion of super harrier.

[@samgemsgems7571]

Give a new life to upgraded super harrier.india buy 300 immediately

[@samgemsgems7571]

No one yet able to replace harrier.it is a surprise why UK abondoned this fine machine.foolish decision.

[@danielmocsny5066]

The F35 might have a short window along with all other manned aircraft.

[@philipjones8013]

British airframe, yes. But nozzle vectoring was a French invention.

[@bigred4592]

that's the best looking aerospace engineer I've ever seen.

[@stanleybuchan4610]

I assume you mean the woman!

[@MickGough1957]

We did have a supersonic Harrier in the planning stage called P.1154 but was canceled in 1965 by the incoming government. It would have been capable of Mach 2 and carried twice the fuel and weapons load. So we could have had an F-35 50 years sooner but without stealth capability. Not a downside because no one was building stealth planes at the time. Another British first stymied by short-sighted politicians.

[@esecallum]

WHY U OBSESSED WITH SUPERSONICS? YOU STILL CANT OUT RUN AN ATA MISSILE.

[@ionator2000ist]

@@esecallum no you might not be able to run away from it but going faster means the missile has a smaller window it has to get to hit the target vs the slower moving aircraft.

[@esecallum]

@@ionator2000ist rubbish. missiles are very fast nowadays that it makes no difference if it goes at mach 0.7 or mack 2 as th missile is mach 12

[@gonzomuse]

@@esecallum Apart from the in development "hypersonic" missiles, which are huge and wont be air to air most AA missiles travel around Mach 4. Much above that and heat from air friction causes issues.

[@mike390099]

I wish he had mentioned the Hawker P1154 in this video. It deserved a mention.

[@danvez5656]

my Uncle was one of the engineers who designed the Harrier, im quite proud to be able to say that, what a legendary machine.

[@nerdybritishkoala3697]

My dad remembers being stopped on his school bus a few times a month, when he lived in West Germany, for harriers to then appear out from the woods beside and then take off. Just like that.

[@the_yeegineer]

Damn this plane is awesome

[@mikeef747]

The Harrier served it's purpose and will always be iconic, and without it who knows if the F-35 would've included vertical takeoff, it was certainly a proof of concept.

[@phmwu7368]

Lockheed F-35B is a VTOL version ... as good as a Harrier ? 🤔 Seen the losses of the past few wweks, we wouldn't think so but time will tell...

[@mikeef747]

@@phmwu7368 First, Did you know there have been over 230 Harriers lost? And that only 8 were lost from being shot down? The F-35 has only had one VTOL failure in the South Korean Air Force. The other 7 incidents had nothing to do with VTOL, they were a combination of human error crashes, one bad engine & one bad fuel tube.

[@AA-xo9uw]

@@phmwu7368 F-35B is STOVL not VTOL although it can perform a vertical takeoff.

[@AA-xo9uw]

@@mikeef747 "And that only 8 were lost from being shot down?"(sic) Quite a few more than 8. "The F-35 has only had one VTOL failure in the South Korean Air Force."(sic) Incorrect. The South Korean Air Force does not yet operate the F-35B STOVL. There is some speculation they may eventually procure the variant in the 2030s for their LPX-II boat. A South Korean Air Force F-35A suffered a gear malfunction and executed a gear up landing at Seosan back on 4 January 2022. There have been three F-35B crashes - two USMC - one fuel line failure, one mid-air collision with a KC-130J, one RAF which rolled off the ski jump on the HMS Queen Elizabeth during an attempt to abort the takeoff, with an additional in flight fire on a third USMC F-35B. That aircraft was not repaired and is now used as a training aid. The cause of the RAF F-35B crash has yet to be determined despite what the UK tabloid the Sun wants you to believe.

[@mikeef747]

@@AA-xo9uw Slow down and try reading what I wrote, because I clearly stated only 8 HARRIERS were shot down out of the 230 that were lost. I purposely wrote this in my first paragraph to separate my rebuttal to @Ph MWU about Harriers. It was not until my 2nd paragraph that I spoke about F-35's, which is EXACTLY why I seperated my comments in paragraphs, like I'm doing again, but somehow you couldn't see the obvious separation. There has NEVER been a single F-35 SHOT DOWN....I NEVER SAID there was. You'll notice there is no "Edited" on my previous comments, so read it again!!

[@BritishBeachcomber]

Working in aerospace electronics, I was fortunate to have VIP tickets for the Farnborough Airshow. We were allowed on the apron while a Harrier took off vertically and did low level vectored manoeuvres. Awesome sight. Even with ear defenders I could feel the sound resonating in my chest. The AN-225 was also there but for some reason did not fly on the day.

[@suvodipde5432]

Served our Indian Navy for so many years. Salute all those brave pilots.

[@daniel72_751]

We didn’t need to make another ‘Harrier’. It worked worked perfectly at the time for the UK military’s Cold War role - close air support in WW3 Germany and fleet defence from our micro carriers (high acceleration and slow speed performance great for air to air). Ditto Tornado. Now we have super carriers and fight expeditionary conflicts which require air superiority, the Typhoon and Lightning are the right manned aircraft - and close air support is delivered by UAVs. TBH, the Typhoon could in theory have delivered all our requirements, however the F-35 has impressive stealth and 6th generation capabilities.

[@robertdore9592]

10:02 Technology transfer? and not for the first time either.

[@Gynra]

The problem for us is the technology transfer seems to go only one way...

[@terryjohnbaker]

I was on a beach in Weston super mare when a couple of harriers, for no obvious reason, came and performed a short show just in front of us. The two planes stopped, hovered about 20 metres up, went slowly backwards, and then bowed, all in perfect coordination. So impressive.

[@barry7608]

Thanks I gave you a like as it was very informative. My dad was an aircraft engineer and worked for Rolls Royce during the second WW. Ive got his Merlin operating manual, its my pride and joy.

[@Cliffjumper24]

There was somthing promised at thye start of this video but not delivered... why did Britain stop using the Harrier? The British Harrier GR7's were withdrawn from service as a part of the 2010 Defence Review, with a Tory 'austerity' government wanting to reduce spending. Unfortunately, less than half of the Harrier fleet had servicable engines, and most were close to their airframe lifespan. The government had two options. 1: An expensive service life extension programme with new enginesm new wings and airframe life extension... for an aircraft what would be replaced in 10 years time by the F-35. 2: Mothball the Harrier with the Royal Navy carriers, use the Tornado for Ground Attack requirements, and add a ground attack ability for the Typhoon, And, focus spending on the new Queen Elizabeth class of carriers with the F-35 in mind. They went with option 2, however they decided to change the carriers have catapults, and switch to the F-35C variant (which has more fuel capacity because there is no lift engine), but changed their mind back to the F-35B V/STOL version. They also cancelled the Nimrod MR4, which was reaching the end of it's development and testing phase, and ordered the completeled development aircraft and completed airframes to be scrapped, along with the jigs... preventing a change of plan later... and then buy an off-the-shelf Maritime reconnaisance platform. In the end, we bought nine Poseidon aircraft from the US (which isn't as good as what the Nimrod MR2 could do, because it can't do low level flight due to being a Boeing 737 derivative that doesn't have the extra strength required for heavy turbulant air found at low level), although Japan tried to change MOD monds with their Kawasaki P-1 which better fits the Nimrod's abilities. Above is my rational explanation... but my emotional attachment to the Harrier wishes we'd kept them fluing longer!

[@suzyqualcast6269]

F35 = air barges and useless for close quarters combat.

[@GrahamWalters]

The reason is simpler than this video leads you to believe, it was retired because the UK didn't see a use for Aircraft carriers, instead they invested in submarines capable of delivering payloads from thousands of miles away. Plus it was sub sonic, and was just outdated

[@idonthavealoginname]

You could have saved yourself a lot of writing by just saying David Camerons government wanted to save money, thats why the Harrier etc were binned full stop.Once again our useless over rated MP's strike again.

[@idonthavealoginname]

@@GrahamWalters It was to save money after the 2008 economic crash, it was nothing to do with military doctrine.

[@GrahamWalters]

@@idonthavealoginname Beg to differ, when the last carrier Ark Royal (RO9) was decomminssioned in 1978 the Navy were told there was no need for carriers, as the theatre and threat had changed, it was the beginning of the end of the cold war and nuclear armed aircraft capability. The RN however saw things differently and conned the gevernment into building "Through deck cruisers, which were basically small carriers ( Invincible class), These were being discussed and designed well before 2008. The last being decommissioned in 2014 (after being relegated to the role of helicopter carrier) The Queen Elizabeth class were ordered by the Blair government, and was to be two carriers, QE and POW each carrying an assorment of fixed wing and rotary aircraft. Cameron tried to cancel then on the grounds of cost, and by reason that they would be outdated by the time they were commissioned ( he's been proven right on that one). The issue was the penatly clause for cancelling would have cost the UK more than going ahead. We are now in situation where we have two carriers we cannot man, or provide fixed wing aircraft for, also the Class 45 Destroyers designed as part of their support squadron spend more time in maintenance than at sea, and are at present being returned to Cammel Laird to have new (different) engines fitted. To coin RN expressions it's been SNAFU'd and FUBAR'd since day one

[@jds6206]

The AV-8A/B in USMC inventory provided "a capability"; that's what armed forces have: capabilities. They are conceived, designed, funded, constructed and put in the hands of armed forces to face adversarial threats. Every capability, whether an airplane, or ship or tank or truck or firearm or field equipment item (boot, pack, helmet, etc.) has a lifecycle during which it is useful, maintainable and relevant to the armed forces (all militaries think this way). Threats, which lead nations to develop capabilities, come and go; they get bigger and more important, and they sometimes are no longer threats as technology overcomes them. So, airplanes. Most often, airplanes are retired because their maintenance to flight hour ratio becomes too great, i.e., they cost too much to maintain for every hour they're in the air. Probably, the British Harrier population became too expensive for Britain to maintain them. "Cost" is relative. The USMC flew Harriers longer because it decided they were worth maintaining (spending the money) to keep them in their inventory. Lot of people think the F4 Phantom or the F14 Tomcat were / are great airplanes and lament they're not in the inventory today. Both those airplanes were retired because they were overcome by technology and were too expensive to maintain, i.e., their maintenance hour to flight hour ratio was going off the chart. F35? It's new; it will be "relatively" cheaper to fly and will/should have an excellent maintenance hour to flight hour ratio, i.e., fewer maintenance hours / many flight hours. The Harrier's retirement was emotional for some; totally unemotional for others.

[@Dumbrarere]

On the contrary, the F-14, specifically the D-model "Super Tomcat" and its proposed E-model, had plenty of years to work with. Under cruising power (meaning, not on reheat/afterburner) had greater range and combat capability than the early Hornets, and an effective and proven radar guided air to air weapons system. The decision to retire it was unfortunately more politically driven than out of economic or practical reasoning, due in part to the rise of Anti-American policies in Iran, and lobbyists in the US government at the time pushing for blanket deployments of more F/A-18s across our navy and marine corps as conventional carrier-born multirole fighters. Like the Harrier in Britain, the Tomcat was simply retired too early.

[@roijoi6963]

@@Dumbrarere Nope. The TomCat was very expensive to make, still more expensive to maintain, and even more expensive than that to arm and fuel. For all of that you had a plane that only had 1 trick - it's initial rate of turn was great. Unfortunately, it was also a 1-Turn pony, because it bled energy like a stuck pig, so its sustained turn rate was horrific. Being a swing-wing is was always going to be too heavy to compete with any near-peer fighter jet (F-15, F-16, F-18, Mig-29, SU-27-35, Rafel, Gripin, Typhoon/EuroFighter) The entire justification for the F-14 was the Phoenix missile, which never shot down a single thing in its entire history. A failure wrapped in a failure is not a success.

[@wurzzzz]

@@roijoi6963 Not sure where you learned any of that, but none of it was true--other than it being expensive.

[@yixnorb5971]

In a word: OBSOLETE

[@starijedan1705]

@@roijoi6963 medium.com/war-is-boring/the-tomcats-first-phoenix-kill-a17ae6b57038 not quite true

[@FatboyGengiz]

*''I counted them all out and I counted them all back''* - Iconic reportage from the late Brian Hanrahan

[@oorah245]

I will always miss the Harrier, it was one of my favourite jets

[@63Baggies]

Mine too, although I'm partial to the F-4 Phantom...

[@woodonfire7406]

Same goes to me as well, even if I'm more of a Russian/ French/ Swedish jet person

[@paulpark1170]

But it’s 2020 not 1960....

[@spartanx9293]

Eh my favorites always going to be the super hornet

[@ariftanoli9768]

One of the best British designed fighter aircraft. I remembered the Falkland war like yesterday's when all British were pray for British Forces in the Churches, Masjids , temples and Gurduwaras.We were all together right behind our Forces and we won the war against Argentina.

[@STScott-qo4pw]

Your Queen and Her people deserved to win that war.

[@RCAvhstape]

The US Marines were interested in the Harrier because it fit into the Marines' concept of expeditionary warfare. Think about the Pacific campaign of WWII where Marines were seizing islands and operating aircraft from small airstrips. It's tough to do that with an F-4 Phantom. VSTOL jets give the Marines the ability to bring their own fast mover close air support with them on amphibious ships' flight decks, and then move ashore to small hastily built airfields as the Marines move inland. The F-35B is needed so that the ships can stand farther off shore in a more lethal environment. This is also why the Marines so stubbornly stuck to the development of the V-22 Osprey through all its problems. Since the F-35B has had so many development problems as well, the AV-8B version of the Harrier will remain in service for a few more years yet. The earlier AV-8B configuration did not have radar; it used an electro-optical bombing system which is the bluish-colored lens seen in the nose of some of the Harriers in this video. Just before the Gulf War of 1991, some AV-8Bs were equipped with an IR system and were called "Night Attack Harriers" by the Marines, but most of the Harriers that saw combat in 1991 were ordinary "day attack" jets. After the Gulf War, AV-8Bs started getting radar sets installed in their noses. If you look at Marine Harriers today, the nose is a bigger, pointier radome. While this makes them look like different jets, many of them are the same airframes that flew in the late 80s and early 90s, just with upgrades and newer paint schemes. The radar upgrade theoretically allows the AV-8B to conduct beyond-visual-range air combat using the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile; something no Harrier could do before. I don't think the Marines do this in practice; the primary purpose of the Harrier is ground attack in support of Marine infantry. AV-8B Harriers can also carry the common Sidewinder missile for self defense against enemy fighters. The AV-8B uses a 25mm five-barrel rotary cannon in a custom external pod that is semi-permanently installed under the fuselage centerline behind the nose wheel well. It's actually two pods side by side; one contains the gun and the other the ammo magazine. The pod has aerodynamic strakes on it that, along with the forward and aft landing gear doors, make a sort of box that enhances engine lift when hovering, so it's very uncommon to see an AV-8B without a gun pod. The 25mm projectiles are made with depleted uranium and while not quite as impressive as the 30mm gun on the A-10, will do impressive damage to anyone or anything unfortunate enough to become a target. Certainly more effective on armor than the 20mm Vulcan found on most US jets.

[@charlesbarbour2331]

The Harrier II Plus which you say can use the AIM120 was bought into service with the Flying Tigers June 1993. The Sea Harrier F/A.2 was doing AMRAAM firing trials in March 1993 so both Harriers vesions got this missile at the same time: source: BaE/McDonnell Douglas Harrier by Andy Evans

[@HOTRAINS95]

Op

[@steffennilsen2132]

The F-35 uses the same gun as the AV-8B, although a lightweight version with only 4 instead of 5 barrels

[@t.a.871]

Highly unlikely the Pacific model of 1942-45 willl define Marine operations in any future war in Asia.

[@humansvd3269]

@@t.a.871 Lol, Taiwan, China and potential Korean conflict ring a bell?

[@jksharma7]

Thank you for wonderful video. It reminded me all the Good time I had in UK-yeovilton for 2 years when I was being train on Sea-Harrier as Electrical Engineer.

[@Hypersonik]

14:21 Absolute bogus comment about the elephants. Even a small adult elephant weighs over 5000lbs. So it couldn't generate enough thrust to even lift 10 elephants, let alone accelerate them to the top of the Empire State building in 7 seconds...

[@kaneo6162]

Literal much?

[@julianneale6128]

Indian or African elephant?

[@dforrest4503]

Julian Neale European or African swallow?

[@julianneale6128]

@@dforrest4503African Swallow granted, they could lift it by the husk!

[@Hypersonik]

@@julianneale6128 African Forest Elephant. Anything else is much heavier

[@U2QuoZepplin]

I love this !! I’m a complete layman and totally outside the industry and the military but its beyond fascinating!

[@dr.barrycohn5461]

I want one of those so bad...not just Schwarzenegger used it, so did Bruce Willis. Love that plane.

[@tylerdurden3722]

I think Bruce used the F-35🤔

[@richardadkins6998]

What became the Harrier was the P1127 or Kestrel. The P1154 supersonic ST/VOL with Bristol BS100 engine was under development, but cancelled in 1965 at the same time at TSR-2 and the HS681 Transport plane.

[@jtitford42]

A relation of mine was the liason between this project and Royal Navy. Very amazing!

[@charliestrains9826]

Let's be honest though, the F35 can't replace the A10, nothing can, not with the gun the A10 has

[@leftcoaster67]

And the durability and simplicity of its design..

[@chengdogu6352]

The question is really whether that gun needs to be replaced. It's the effect which is delivered which matters, and doing it in an effective, safe, supportable manner.

[@toofless4541]

The A-10 is special because of its loiter time, not any weapon it has on board. That thing can be on call and ready to strike for hours on end. F-35 is way a more capable platform than the A-10 in everything except fuel capacity. Yes, the F-35 can carry a heavier payload than the Warthog.

[@cyrilculton1181]

It'll be a sad day when the A-10 is retired.

[@justinchan6594]

@Blob B what

[@camrenwick]

I remember being on exercise with BAOR 1976 - 85 and seeing Harriers in the countryside under the huge camo-nets or in the air. Fantastic.