The following are just some thoughts around the USMC and their AV-8B Harrier.
Number of AV-8Bs built for all customers: 323
Program cost US$6.5 billion (1987)
Unit cost US$24–30 million
USMC AV-8B mission capability (MC) rates:
-Desert Storm-over 90pc. Average turnaround time during the ground war surge rate flight operations was 23 minutes.
-Kosovo 1999-91.8pc.
-Iraq 2003-85pc.(OK)
Chief F-35B marketeer and F-35B fan-club president Gen. Amos said this about the AV-8B in Iraq: "I simply could not have been more pleased with the reliability of the airplane and its weapons systems... and in the courage and discipline of my AV8 pilots."
Radius, interdiction: 454 nautical miles
Or according to Global Security: (seems high but so is F-35 marketing)
Hi-lo-hi, short take off (366 m, seven Mk 82 Snakeye Bombs, two 300 US gallon external fuel tanks no loiter-594 nautical miles
Deck launch intercept mission, two AIM-9 missiles and two external fuel tanks-627 nautical miles
Active USMC squadrons: 6 line squadrons; 1 training squadron.
Cost per flight hour: $11,134
Expected to be in-service until 2030.
So you see some of the challenges for the USMC F-35B want:
- F-35 expensive acquisition cost.
- F-35 cost per flying hour 3-4 times that of a Harrier.
- Poor F-35B MC rates.
- Harrier sustainable to 2030.
- The F-35 can't take on emerging threats (obsolete JORD), which means legacy aircraft do non-high-threat work better/cheaper.
- The over-hype of STOVL combat ops.
- Many other existing fire-support options for the Marine.
- No two-aircrew option like the F-18.
---
SOUTH CHINA SEA (Feb. 9, 2013) Sailors and Marines reattach the wings of an AV-8 Harrier assigned to Marine Attack Squadron (VMA) 542 in the hangar bay of the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6). The Bonhomme Richard Amphibious Ready Group is deployed in the U. S. 7th Fleet area of responsibility and will take part in amphibious integration training (AIT), certification exercise (CERTEX), and participate in the annual multi-national combined joint training exercise Cobra Gold. (U. S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Amanda S. Kitchner/Released)
2 comments:
I carry no brief for the disastrous F-35 in any variant, but the Harrier isn't much better.
While quoting comparative statistics, one must quote the extraordinarily high Class A mishap rate for Harriers. Usually this involves a total loss of the airframe. And it is devilishly likely to kill its pilot. Look at those statistics as well.
The choice of photos is instructive, showing flight line wrenches working to put the wing back on. Consider that it is necessary to take the wing OFF the Harrier in order to change out the engine. A step which must be taken more frequently than with any other fighter in service. Many, many hours are required for this. Many, many dollars will be sucked out of rapidly shrinking budgets.
As for the engine itself, RR have closed the Pegasus line. If it's desired to have Harriers for the foreseeable future, restarting that line is technically feasible, but will be economically horrible. Cost per engine will go to the moon.
The fundamental propulsive layout of the Harrier is horrible against IR seekers.
Some may recall seeing Israeli-adapted A-4 Skyhawks with long sheet metal cans tacked on to the engine nozzle. That was their cheap and ingenious way to get IR seekers to detonate away from the vulnerable parts of the aircraft. It worked.
Guess where the Harrier has hot IR-visible nozzles? Snuggled right up against the most vulnerable parts of the aircraft. Several Desert Storm losses of Harriers were to bone simple IR MANPADS that would not have had a chance against a different jet. Abrupt doctrinal changes were required right away. The Harrier's unique vulnerability in that regard did not serve it well in combat.
Its inferior IR signature management is matched by a great big radar return. Which is not easy to engineer out due to the unique flight profile. Eric, you often and correctly damn the F-35 for its inability to survive against modern area-denial SAM threats. The Harrier can't do that either.
It's a frankly brilliant design. For the late 1950s, which was its era of inception. Let us put it in museums where it belongs.
For the USMC, instead, let us recommend cheap and capable VTOL attack platforms which will do the job much better. They are called "helicopters".
Salute to the Harrier B-II. Thanks for your gallant service.
Replace her, along with the geriatric and desperately needing replacement, legacy Hornets with a mix between maybe 50-75x F-18E/F block II+ Supers (w/ next-gen type IV computer, CFT and possibly the more fuel efficient EDE engine)... and perhaps around 50-75x (night-day) Super Tucano.
Modify perhaps around 20-30x super Tucano and train for special LHD/LHA expedition operations, as required.
Call it a day.
Post a Comment