STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16317 posts, RR: 52 Posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9325 times:
The US Navy has signed a deal to purchase the UK's entire decommissioned fleet of Harriers, 74 aircraft plus spares. The additional aircraft will be used to begin replacing the Marine Corp's F-18Ds (two seaters) which have worn out. This deal will get the Marine Corps to 2025 which is when the F-35B will have replaced the entire Marine Corps Harrier fleet.
Quote: The Harrier IIs, built between 1980 and 1995, “are still quite serviceable,” he said. “The aircraft are not that far apart. We’re taking advantage of all the money the Brits have spent on them. It’s like we’re buying a car with maybe 15,000 miles on it.”
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3893 posts, RR: 13 Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9300 times:
Quoting STT757 (Thread starter): The US Navy has signed a deal to purchase the UK's entire decommissioned fleet of Harriers, 74 aircraft plus spares. The additional aircraft will be used to begin replacing the Marine Corp's F-18Ds (two seaters) which have worn out. This deal will get the Marine Corps to 2025 which is when the F-35B will have replaced the entire Marine Corps Harrier fleet.
The big assumption there is that the F-35B will actually go into service. But I did wonder where all those Harriers would go, they were in pretty decent shape fatigue-wise. I believe a private operator snapped up two -- perhaps that fellow down in South Africa who already has a pair of EE Lightnings.
How many AV-8B/Harriers are now in the USMC inventory ? Has to be something over 200, I'd say.
garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5251 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 8852 times:
Could be an indication of a pending delay or cancellation that now, having bought the planes, can continue.
The article would disagree with you - it paints this as a stopgap measure until the F-35 comes online.
The thing that puzzles me is replacing the F/A-18D with the Harriers. Why not replace them with F/A-18Fs? While it'd be more expensive, it seems like you'd be keeping and expanding on the -D's capabilities. Also what does this mean for the USMC's WSO community?
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12735 posts, RR: 79 Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 8822 times:
Odd, these aircraft are seen as having been hard worked, at least that was one justification the UK govt made for scrapping them not long after many had been upgraded.
Also, there are many differences with these and the USMC fleet, beyond the extra AIM-9 launch rail on each wing.
The Marconi Zeus internal ECM system, in fact just about all of the avionics will be different.
The upgrade path these aircraft had was/is entirely different to the USMC.
oykie From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2577 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 8799 times:
Quoting 328JET (Reply 2): I am not sure if that deal is a good sign for the F35B-program...
According to USMC aviation chief plan B for the F-35 is to try harder. According to him there is no other alternative for the US Marine Corps. Their multipurpose amphibious assault ships needs the F-35 as a key part. The Harrier will only serve as an interim solution. Killing the F-35B will have a serious impact on the Marine Corps.
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2744 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 8762 times:
Quoting garnetpalmetto (Reply 4): The thing that puzzles me is replacing the F/A-18D with the Harriers. Why not replace them with F/A-18Fs? While it'd be more expensive, it seems like you'd be keeping and expanding on the -D's capabilities. Also what does this mean for the USMC's WSO community?
Well, the WSO was getting the axe with the F-35 anyway, so might as well do it now. I can sure understand the loss of the F-18D due to fatigue issues. They've been flown like crazy since 2001 (USMC had a policy of using the WSO as an airborne FO, these airframes have been in constant combat).
Bringing the UK birds online could be difficult, but we could see 2 different approaches: Buy them and convert to AV-8B standard
Or create the AV-8C by keeping them close to British standard. I'm sure the 25mm gun pods can still be installed.
What marks of Harrier are being purchased? All remaining GR5/7/9?
Devilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4451 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 8755 times:
Quoting GDB (Reply 5): Odd, these aircraft are seen as having been hard worked, at least that was one justification the UK govt made for scrapping them not long after many had been upgraded.
Well, I think they needed to say that so those could be disposed of... to remove one more possible hindrance to the F-35C acquisition.
Quoting GDB (Reply 5): Also, there are many differences with these and the USMC fleet, beyond the extra AIM-9 launch rail on each wing.
The Marconi Zeus internal ECM system, in fact just about all of the avionics will be different.
The upgrade path these aircraft had was/is entirely different to the USMC.
I guess the Marines will just have to deal with those to keep their F-35B aspirations alive.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3893 posts, RR: 13 Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 8700 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 7): Bringing the UK birds online could be difficult, but we could see 2 different approaches: Buy them and convert to AV-8B standard
Or create the AV-8C by keeping them close to British standard. I'm sure the 25mm gun pods can still be installed.
What marks of Harrier are being purchased? All remaining GR5/7/9?
I think all the remaining Harriers were GR7/9 standard, plus a few two-seaters. But don't the GR7/9 & AV-8B have different wings ? Or is it just the number of hardpoints ? Then of course the electronics. Could be as big a job as the F-35B !
n901wa From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 389 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 8431 times:
I wonder if this means VMFA(aw)-332 will come out of cadre status as a AV-8B unit? I also wonder if the D's with time left will be inter mixed with the other Hornet units, like VMFA-232 did with taking 2 D's with the C's on the last deployment. I think it's a great idea to give the USMC some room till the F-35B/C arrive or another frame shows up.
ThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1115 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 8425 times:
Quoting kanban (Reply 3): Could be an indication of a pending delay or cancellation that now, having bought the planes, can continue.
F-35B is about to leave the probationary period that was imposed by the DoD earlier this year. Lockheed Martin has overcome a number of technical issues to reach sea-based trials, which apparently is doing very well.
The USMC is also more content to introduce F-35B into service earlier; they for example, will declare IOC with the F-35B using the Block 2B software, not the Block 3 software the A and C's will be IOC.
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2500 posts, RR: 21 Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 8400 times:
Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 11): The USMC is also more content to introduce F-35B into service earlier;
We still need to see if the joint committee reaches an agreement.. by the end of the month.. If they don't, the Marines will never see the B except as plastic display models.
garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5251 posts, RR: 55 Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 8202 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 7): Well, the WSO was getting the axe with the F-35 anyway, so might as well do it now. I can sure understand the loss of the F-18D due to fatigue issues. They've been flown like crazy since 2001 (USMC had a policy of using the WSO as an airborne FO, these airframes have been in constant combat).
I definitely understand the F/A-18Ds are worn out, I guess I always sort of assumed that they'd be replaced by F/A-18Fs rather than the F-35s.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16317 posts, RR: 52 Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 8202 times:
Quoting 328JET (Reply 2): I am not sure if that deal is a good sign for the F35B-program...
Actually it is a good sign, if there were real doubts about the F-35 entering service with the Marines they would be looking at acquiring new Super Hornets. This acquasition is a stop gap to address the immediate need for F-18D replacements, there are 131 Marine F-18D's. This allows them to begin to retire the highest hour F-18D frames.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10572 posts, RR: 21 Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 8189 times:
Quoting garnetpalmetto (Reply 4): The thing that puzzles me is replacing the F/A-18D with the Harriers. Why not replace them with F/A-18Fs?
Thinking geopolitically, if the USMC gets Super Hornets, USMC units are more and more likely going to be used interchangeably with USN units, which is of course something they don't want. Getting the Harriers strengthens the USMC traditional littoral CAS mission, and its shorter legs compared to the SH makes it hard for joint commanders to task them otherwise.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5918 posts, RR: 8 Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 8163 times:
Quoting garnetpalmetto (Reply 4): The thing that puzzles me is replacing the F/A-18D with the Harriers. Why not replace them with F/A-18Fs?
Quoting Revelation (Reply 15): Thinking geopolitically, if the USMC gets Super Hornets, USMC units are more and more likely going to be used interchangeably with USN units, which is of course something they don't want. Getting the Harriers strengthens the USMC traditional littoral CAS mission, and its shorter legs compared to the SH makes it hard for joint commanders to task them otherwise.
Yes the Marines fall under the jurisdiction of the Navy but the more a/c they can keep on their brown water boats the more control they have over them providing CAS support to the grunts on the ground, unlike the Navy and Air Force, Marine pilots are grunts who fly.
The Navy has had issue retaining pilots, one of the ways to correct is to transfer Marine squadrons as the Marines have no problems with recruiting, how long that would last is not being looked at, this is a short term solution and the Marines are fighting.
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7645 times:
Quoting garnetpalmetto (Reply 4): Why not replace them with F/A-18Fs? While it'd be more expensive, it seems like you'd be keeping and expanding on the -D's capabilities
There's your answer, cost. I'm also going to guess that the USMC views the F/A-18F as a threat to the F-35B.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3893 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7634 times:
Quoting LMP737 (Reply 18): I'm also going to guess that the USMC views the F/A-18F as a threat to the F-35B
I'd expand that to say it might be a threat to the whole concept of a Marine Air Wing. If they mount up on F/A-18Fs, why not have them in the Navy ? They'd be using the same deck space.
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2744 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7577 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 19): I'd expand that to say it might be a threat to the whole concept of a Marine Air Wing. If they mount up on F/A-18Fs, why not have them in the Navy ? They'd be using the same deck space.
They seemed to work well off carriers in the pre-Harrier days, why wouldn't they now?
garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5251 posts, RR: 55 Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7447 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 20):
They seemed to work well off carriers in the pre-Harrier days, why wouldn't they now?
Further, having the F/A-18C and F/A-18D hasn't threatened the independence of Marine aviation, even with the inclusion of a VMFA in some CVWs. Why would replacing the F/A-18Ds with F/A-18Fs suddenly endanger that?
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16317 posts, RR: 52 Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7260 times:
Quoting 328JET (Reply 17): How can a Harrier really replace a Hornet...?
The Marines operate the F-18A, F-18C and F-18D. The D models are for ground attack/close air support. The AV-8 Harriers have proved themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan in the same roles.
328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 7223 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 23): The AV-8 Harriers have proved themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan in the same roles.
But not in the same class...
25 STT757: For what the Marines do they are more than adequte until the F-35B arrives.
26 328JET: For me they are perfect for the marines, no doubt. But i have the bad feeling that the 35B will be pushed a bit more then we expect.
27 LMP737: The USMC buying the Superhornet would not necessarily threaten marine aviation. It could possibly, in the USMC eye's, threaten the F-35B.
28 Max Q: Pretty sad when the nation that created the Harrier has to sell them off for some extra cash..
29 328JET: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...al-landings-on-some-f-35bs-365059/ Some more delay...?
30 STT757: If you read the article it states the cracks were expected and a redesign was done to other aircraft to address the issue.
31 ThePointblank: More information on the USMC Harrier purchase; they are for spare parts only. This move will save the USMC 1 billion dollars in the long run on spare
32 STT757: Here's an opinion about selling the Harriers to Taiwan, in lieu of the recently denied F-16 sale the AV-8 would make an even better alternative; The H
33 GDB: Makes sense for spares, it would cost a lot to make them operationally compatible with USMC birds.
34 andz: To the best of my knowledge Thunder City has ceased operations. I am currently in Cape Town so I will see what I can find out.
35 bennett123: iirc, they closed after a fatal Lightning crash. He had partial undercarriage failure, followed by an ejector seat malfunction. The pilot ran out of o
36 connies4ever: Hmmm...had not heard that. Bad luck for the pilot. Apparently you could book a ride in one of the Lightnings or am I mistaken ?
37 Devilfish: Methinks these offer better range and more bang for the buck..... . http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...11s-offers-seven-buries-23-365321/
38 bennett123: Why bury them. Surely they must have some scrap value.
39 Devilfish: Ostensibly, to mitigate HazMat risks. There are those who value them much more than that..... Quote: "The decision to dispose of the aircraft in this
40 redflyer: They probably had cardiac arrest...as I almost did after spitting up my coffee when I saw that photo.
41 andz: You are not mistaken, you could get a ride in a Lightning, Buccaneer or Hunter. The website has a lot of inactive links. http://www.thundercity.com A
42 parapente: I think the aquisition is a stop-gap because the F35B will be delayed. I think that is the answer really. For spares they are - as stated, a very good
43 wvsuperhornet: Not trying to stir anything but with looming budget cuts why not just disabandon the marine corps air wing the US navy can provide the same air cover
44 B17GUNNER24: Bad news for the F-35 program but nice to know our harriers are getting a nice home
45 spudh: ???? Are you trying to get Pointblank going on this thread too! Its always been highly questionable if the Superbug is even as good as the aircraft i
46 ThePointblank: I would debate the WVR note, but the F-35B is a superior aircraft in every way compared to the Harrier.
47 par13del: During WWII a large number of Marine Squadrons were land based rather than carrier based, during the cold war not much changed prior to the advent of
48 spudh: I don't want to hijack the thread but from every report I've read on red flag excercises etc the Harrier has accounted for every aircraft it has come
49 GDB: One would hope so with a more than 40 year gap between the basic design of them both! So the F-35B has had design and development problems? Consideri
50 ThePointblank: The problem is the that the reason why USMC squadrons are operating off of USN carriers is because of manning issues; the USMC is better able to reta
51 GDB: Yes, but there has been talk about the USMC maybe getting F-35C's, or Super Hornets.
52 LMP737: Don't tell the Marines that. Budgets played a bigger part inhaving USMC Hornet squadrons attached to carrier air wings. When the A-6 Intruder went aw
53 LMP737: I know it's part of the Marines rationale to have air cover flying off the decks of the gator boats. But lets be honest, in the unlikely event there
54 GDB: Indeed, it's like the debate here with the Parachute Regiment. Some point out that the last time they actually did a jump into combat was at Suez in
55 LMP737: I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall at the Ministry of Defense! True, it's just that countries can empty their coffers rather quickly t
56 connies4ever: Same for Canada, realistically. I don't think the Airborne Regiment ever jumped into combat. And after the disgraceful behaviour evidenced in Somalia
57 checksixx: You're right...the AIM-9X has nothing on the Harrier... The A-10 doesn't have any fixed wing kills at all. No Harrier, from any military, has had an
58 GDB: The VIFF while impressive, did not actually result in any kills in the Falklands, the air to air kills were mostly tail chases. (After an initial, abo
59 wvsuperhornet: Evidently you didn't read my post very well at no point and time did I say the F-18 was superior to the F-35, it is superior to the harriers they are
60 spudh: You're right, I mis-read your post. Please accept a humble apology. Consider me suitably chastised I'm just comparing airframe manoeuvering capabilit
61 GDB: Quite right, both RAF and RN Harrier pilots likely trained to do this in Air to Air as well. Had the Argentine pilots been allowed to be more aggress
62 wvsuperhornet: Appology accepted no problem!!! Your a good person spudh !!!![Edited 2011-12-12 16:41:01]
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16317 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3893 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12735 posts, 
From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2577 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2744 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4451 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5918 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
