Monday, January 26, 2026

 


8 comments:

  1. Never fly under a Harrier, as it may fall out of the sky at any second.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Entered service in 1969 and only the F35B, which costs $109,000,000US, can match its short take-off and vertical landing capabilities.
    Al_in_Ottawa

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, but can it fly real combat missions?

      Delete
  3. The Harrier can take off and land straight up, which means it can operate from limited space, small ships, or even rooftops.

    Only one of the three F-35 models can land vertically. It can't do VTOL like the Harrier. The other two F-35 models require "conventional" runways or launchers and arrestor hooks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “ It can't do VTOL like the Harrier.”

      This is completely false. The F-35B can take off vertically, and unlikethe Harrier, carry a combat payload. It can also of course land vertically.

      Delete

  4. The F-35B far exceeds the STOVL performance of the AV-8B and its predecessor AV-8A. Carries far more payload during vertical and short rolling takeoffs, and can realistically land vertically with unused ordnance instead of having to jettison it like Harrier. Far greater weapons payload, greater combat radius. FAnd much safer to take off, land, and fly in general.

    The AV-8B (pictured above) entered production in 1981 with initial unit cost of about $27M in then-year dollars. The program cost as a whole was criticized for ballooning to $9.1Billion in 1981 compared to its 1979 cost estimate of $6.2.

    $27M in 1981 dollars is about $101M today. So for $8M more we got a lot more airplane.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The taxpayers for at least several generations got wallet raped, again.
      What price (ASSumed) security?

      Delete