Harrier Jets

[Silver]

A post by scorpy in another thread got me thinking about Harrier jets (again!).

Would they be a realistic/good choice of jet for the Air Corps ?
 - bearing in mind the fact that they can operate from small runways - or none at all !

[alpha foxtrot 07]

the F-20 fighter program never made it past the test phase of development. the program was cancelled because nobody was interested in it, when for a little more they could get F-16. of the 4 airframes made 3 are in storage and 1 is in a muesum.

[alpha foxtrot 07]

thats a good idea silver, with the americans and the brits replacing theres with the f-35 there should be plenty used ones around for the corps to buy.

[Turkey]

Alpha, my information is that only one airframe exists, it's in working order in a muesum in Cal. All others were destroyed.
The F-20 program did die because the F-16 had it's sales restrictions removed from it, by Reagan, there seems to be elements of the F-20 in the F/A/T-50.

As far as I know will the replacing of the Jump-Jet take at least another 5-7 years.
Are these jets worth waiting for???
I do think so.
On the other hand: is there a direct need for the IAC to have fighter / strike capability?

I can imagine that they can come in handy on IFOR / KFOR missions around the globe .
But where to train the aircrew?
Ireland will have to rely on the RAF ( again ??) because I don't think so the USMC will do a lot of training for you guys.

But let's cut the c**p: the Harrier GR-4 / AV-8B still is a great sollution for the need of the IAC.

Guinness

[n-e-foo]

Imshi goes into this better in the "which jet" post. The Harrier has a high accident rate and is slow. If we ever do operate jets again in the future, it will be in small numbers. Less than 20. So the idea of getting something like the Harrier would be a mistake, in my opinion. If previous Air Corps losses are anything to go by they'd never be replaced.

The Air Corp need something economical, reliable and effective. The Harrier is effective but thats not enough.

The question of dispersion in the event of war is a bit of a non issue for me. I went into this before in another post. If we were ever to be invaded we could never operate any jet in the numbers required to be an effective force. Either we'd be invaded by the US or the UK (not gonna happen) or by some nation who had already beaten the US/UK - so ever 400 Fast Jets would really make any odds.

The F-5 seems the most likely option - however I am seriously put off by its age. Grippens or the like are the way to go, alas I cant see that kind of money being allocated.

[Turkey]

I have to add a thumbs-down for the Harrier too, slow , noisy and maintaince intensive, being my main reasons for objecting to it.
Like Mister Foo I find the age of the surviving F-5's a bit worrying, perhaps a paitent wait for the new generation of light-fighter might be the wisest course.

[Silver]

Unfortunetly, you guys are pretty spot on regarding the Harrier   '>

While it would be ideal due to it's VTOL abilities, there is little doubt that these same capabilities would add greatly to it's maintenance/running costs - this fact alone would go against it from the start (in AC service).
The DoD (and dept of Finance) would no doubt shudder at the fuel costs alone  !
After all, low running costs was a major factor in the purchase of turboprops over jets.

At the end of the day I suppose we must be realistic. Since the 1960's the only reason the Vampires and Fougas were selected was for possible COIN ops - and nothing else.
And as we all know, the PC-9's will be just as capable (if not more capable) of fulfilling that role.
I reckon the PC-9's will be as good as it gets for a long time  (unless there is a major change in govt policy or another 'Emergency' situation develops).


Still, it's nice to daydream sometimes  '>

[n-e-foo]

I think its rather unfortunate that in being realistic we wind up ruling so many good aircraft out. The Harrier is a very capable jet and in many ways a potentially good aircraft for the Air Corps. Aircraft such as the Grippen, Eurofighter, when suggested by newbies on the board, are laughed out of the place by the people who know what they are talking about and realise its never going to happen. The fact they are right; that the government will most likely not in our lifetimes (im 20) provide the air corps adequately is a travesty. And I'm not just talking about jets, I'm talking about transport, about helecopters about naval ships and our ability (or lack thereof) to provide our troops with any decent level of support when they go abroad. At least as I see it.

I hope the government in the future do provide the funds to allow the air corps move on to the next generation of light fighter aircraft, such as the Mako, but judging by the current status of the air corps, that doesnt look at all likely. I increasingly find the figure of 8 PC-9M's a joke. 8 aircraft for the flight training school. And training for what exactly? Cessna's? Should not at least 12-14 been purchased, allowing for attrition - and what of the display team? Thats not even bringing in the question of making use of their defensive capabilities...

I also originally thought that a very small number of fighter aircraft would be viable but the more I learn, the more it seems a figure of 12 is the bare minimum. When the Air Corps cant even operate a turboprop trainer in such numbers I very much doubt they can dream of jets in such numbers...

Even in an emergency I doubt such aircraft would be bought, there was a civil war up the road from us for 30 years and the Gardai only got suitable aircraft after it had effectively ended. Again as I said before I don't want a great defence forces at the cost of an effective healthcare system or the like, but the government seems completely inept at providing either at the present time.

Finally on the question of helecopters - when this country was in the shithouse (excuse the language) the government was able to afford 2 new Gazelles and new Dauphins. Yet on this board we're forced into discussing the purchase of old secondhand aircraft - and even on that topic it seems like the purchase of such equipment is a pipe dream!

Its not good enough '>

[Silver]

I think I can safely say that most people using this forum would agree with your above post, n-e-foo.

I too wonder why more PC-9's were not purchased - not even the option to purchase more aircraft is (to my knowledge) part of the contract   '>
(When the Army Mowag APC contract was agreed, options were part of it. Hence additional Mowag's were purchased last year - for 1999 prices !).

If options were part of the PC-9 contract, then at least we COULD purchase additions in the coming years for 2002 prices.

Typical DoD planning, i.e. get the bare minimum  

[P.Doff]

Just thinkin out loud,
                            I wonder would Northrop re-introduce the F-20 for us?? I was just looking through some old magazines I have, and the "Tigershark" has some impressive stats seen as its an upgraded f-5!!!

Ok, I'll stop dreaming now!!!