Yet More Good News For The Andrew

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Mr_Fingerz, May 10, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Mr_Fingerz

    Mr_Fingerz LE Book Reviewer

  2. Mr_Fingerz

    Mr_Fingerz LE Book Reviewer

    Would you care to expand?
  3. AlienFTM

    AlienFTM LE Book Reviewer

    You couldn't make it up.
  4. Yeah it'll not be ready in 2020
  5. Agreed, total and utter crap.There seem to be a lot of quotation marks in the article.....I'm sure none of them have been taken out of context.

    Other hurdles must also be overcome, the NAO states, including the landing difficulties. "The STOVL is unable to land vertically on to a carrier in hot, humid and low pressure weather conditions without having to jettison heavy loads. The department advised decision makers of this risk but stated the solution it is developing will be ready by 2020."

    Am I being a mong here, or can anyone tell me what "heavy loads" an aircraft landing on a carrier would be carrying!
  6. A pilot.
    • Like Like x 4
  7. Weapons? IIRC Harrier couldn't land back on with certain weapons fitted, so if it hadn't dropped the weapon on a target it was ditched in the sea. Gets expensive.
  8. Can they not deploy a large floating bouncing castle and jettison the weapons into the large floating bouncy castle prior to landing? Job Jobbed at little cost.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    isn't that a standard thing with vtol though harrier had to dump its load if it was too heavy to hover.
  10. I would have thought that landing on a carrier whilst still tooled up isn't a good idea anyway!
  11. The Guardian has...

    The problem I have starts with:

    Oh, yes, the Harrier - and especially the SHAR - was famed, just famed for its bring-back capability for carrier ops, and indeed, in various circumstances VLs on land bases wasn'... oooh. Hang on.

    FFS, the legacy Hornet can't land back on conventionally with heavy loads...

    One of the reasons that the Sharkey Lobby got into a twist over the 'Oh, yes, Harrier could do the same as a GR4 without having to fly from land bases' argument was that Harrier mates were cheerfully admitting that attempting to launch - not land, launch - from a carrier with a Storm Shadow or, indeed, a PWIII required one to don one of those natty little rising sun headbands so popular amongst Japanese aviators prior to their final sortie and subsequent very short service inquiry such were the er... interesting possibilites that arose.

    As BS says, the article is well, BS...
    • Like Like x 3
  12. It refers to bring-back loads. In essence, having bought munitions at significant cost, if for whatever reason having launched you're not allowed to drop them on someone (see Herrick for details) it's preferable to bring them back for another set of names / insults to be scribbled on and dropped in the future.

    The trouble with the B variant has always been that in a very specific set of environmental circumstances, with a particular weapon load, there isn't enough thrust to land vertically. Hence the development of the SRVL technique, which I personally believe to be somewhat hairy, but others believe to be perfectly achievable.

    For a bit of context, the SHAR used to be able to carry 4 AIM120 AMRAAM weapons. Unfortunately, it couldn't recover back aboard ship with them all when it was very hot. No being allowed to shoot people to get aboard and being rather valuable, instead of launching with four, they ran round with two.

    Short version - the article is b0ll0cks.
  13. As the two esteemed posters have noted above, the article is utter rubbish.

    Generally speaking I'd also wonder how often we'll see airframes tonking along with full loads now anyway given smaller stockpiles, the impact of flying on fatigue life and the likelihood of dumping it if the weather improves.
  14. I always thought it was a bit unsporting that the SHAR didn't have ROE permitting the kinetic despatch of any passing uppity foreigners in the event of a four-AMRAAM fit and a pleasant temperature uplift during the course of the sortie, but I suppose that's why I wasn't temperamentally suited for a career as a LEGAD...
    • Like Like x 2