harrier question?

Question

i know harriers are great fighters and they are able to hover but they only have a speed of 8 to 9 hundred miles per hour so why make a plane that would easily get shot down becasue of its slow speed i mean for example you are a pilot flying a harrier in iraq and then all the sudden an iraq mig-21 gets on your tale and you try to escape but you cant becasue the plane your flying is going up to about 900 mph while the mig is able to hit speeds over 1000 mph

Answer 1

OK, so no one really seems to know much at all about the AV-8B Harrier. First of all it is used as a forward close air SUPPORT aircraft, not initially as a fighter (although it can perform this task well, the F/A-18 is the primary Navy/USMC fighter) it can land close to the FEBA (forward edge of the Battle Area) to re-fuel and re-arm,and be airborne with bombs on target within minutes, giving it an amazingly versatile capability, it is not the USMC's "toy" nor does it usually take off vertically, usually a short take off is used with a full load of fuel and armament. landing is either conventional although is can land vertically. The USMC as well as the RAF use a maneuver called "viffing" or vector/rotating the nozzles of the aircraft to turn inside just about any aircraft flying. Remember, the turning radius at mach 1.6 is about a mile, a harrier can literally turn/move in an instant in some radical direction, if you can turn inside an aircraft, cutting it off, and ending up on its tail, its good bye MiG-29 or Flanker or Rafale or whatever.

Answer 2

I dont even know where to start.
Top speed is not fighting speed.
Also, a Mig-21 could not get behind a harrier going 500mph at sea level, it just couldnt, even the f-15 barely has a chance.
There are almost no aircraft that can break 400mph at sea level, even the mig-25 has problems getting anywhere close to supersonic down there.
The truth is, the harrier is an amazing aircraft.
It has over a 1:1 thrust ratio, loaded, and without an afterburner. Thats incredible.
The harrier could dominate any fighter that has less that a 1:1 thrust ratio. Being so powerful give the harrier the ability to have energy available anytime during a dogfight. A fighter with less thrust would lose speed and maneuverability at a great rate, and would become prey to the harrier.
The F-4 used to use this to its advantage against the mig-21 by getting the mig in a verticle scissors, which drains the mig's energy quickly, and when the mig stalls the f-4 dives on it and makes a kill.
In horizontal fighting, the mig has a wing loading advantage, which allows it to be more maneuverable, so the F-4 pilots would avoid turning fights.
The harrier would have an advantage in either way, and would just outlast the migs momentum and becomes vulnerable.

Answer 3

<>

False, Harriers are close air support i.e. ground attack craft. Why do you think it's designated A/V-8, not F-8? (not to mention F-8's taken)

<< and they are able to hover but they only have a speed of 8 to 9 hundred miles per hour so why make a plane that would easily get shot down becasue of its slow speed>>

Why was A-10 made, which flies even slower? Or A-6? Or any helicopter for that matter? Speed isn't everything.

<< i mean for example you are a pilot flying a harrier in iraq and then all the sudden an iraq mig-21 gets on your tale and you try to escape but you cant becasue the plane your flying is going up to about 900 mph while the mig is able to hit speeds over 1000 mph>>

1) Iraq has no MiGs left. Most of them fled to Iran long time ago.
2) Any Iraqi plane taking off would be detected by US AWACs planes, and intercepted by combat air patrol of F-15's and F-16's. They won't come CLOSE to the Harriers.
3) Are there any Harriers assigned to Iraq? If if there are, they'd be near the coast as they're usually based on the Amphib assault ships and such. They don't have the range to go that far inland any way.
4) Harriers can do what is known as VIFF'ing, basically a super-charged version of "speed-brake" manuever, using the thrust-vectoring capability, to force the enemy to overshoot. After that, the enemy's vulnerable to its heat-seekers.

You need to study the plane's capabilities before you make unfounded pronouncements like this.

Answer 4

(The Harrier is not the AV8B, the AV8B is one of the two American variants of the Harrier. There have been several marks including the GR1, GR5, GR7, GR9, FRS1, FRS5 and FA2. )

Top speed is only important for the record books. The really important thing is manoeuverability, specific excess energy to put it another way. Aircraft are almost never supersonic in combat, it wastes too much energy in drag. One statistic is that the aircraft that enters combat with most available full power time is much more likely to win, unless you can gain an immediate advantage.

A Mig 21 would never stand a chance against a Harrier, it just can't turn well enough and has poor visibility and a bad weapon system. Once combat has been joined the Mig will never be able to go in a straight line for long enough to get clear of the Harrier's missile range. Breaking off combat before winning is extremely dangerous.

The Harriers had absolutely no trouble dealing with Mirages and A4s in the Falklands.

I have never been a fan of the Harrier, its range and payload is too limited, but it was all the RN could persuade the government to buy for them. It was OK as a ground attack aircraft, other than that single very easily damaged engine anyway. The Harrier was P1127, the boys at Hawker Siddeley and the Royal Aircraft Establishment intended it as a proof of concept, the real thing was to be P1154 which had twin afterburning jets. Sadly the UK government has a very poor track record in supporting their aviation industry. TSR2 is another excellent example of this.

Answer 5

The Harrier is considered a great first-response plane. If the Marines needed to support ground units, this would be one of the first to respond. The whole Mig-21 deal is out of the question. In the first Gulf War, the Iraqi Migs were mainly hidden from the US, however were later uncovered. The remaining Migs were eventually shot down or destroyed. Iraq does not currently have an active airforce that would attack the Harriers. Good question, but slight differences in details.

Answer 6

Actually, the Harrier's maximum speed is less than Mach one, and the speed of sound is around 7780 miles per hour at sea level.

Further, apart from very recent airplane (like the F22) supersonic fighters can reach speed abouve Mach one only for short time, suing the afterburner that drains their tank on fuel in no times flat. Most supersonic airplane thus are labelled as having supersonic dash capability, not supercruise (again, the F22 Raptor has that capability).

For dogfighting, airplanes, including those capable of supersonic speed, would do so at subsonic speed, since this is where they retain most of ther thrust for maneuvering, as oposed to just going fast. In the Falkland conflict, the Harrier had a very good kill ratio against much faster plane because they had superior thrust to weight ratio, and that is what matters during aerial combat. Of course, if you have standoff missiles and engage an enemy plane at long range, thrust to weight ratio means nothing, but so does maximum speed.

That said, the Harrier is not an interceptor plane, any high performance fighters likely to encounter Harriers would be dealt with by an escort of F18, F16 of F15 that accompany them anyway.

Answer 7

I'm curious why so many think the Harrier is supersonic. It is not. A Cessna Citation X can outrun one. But that's really beside the point. The Harrier performs its mission very well indeed, and that's the only way to measure a plane. Its ability to land where there are no runways and re-fuel and re-arm are unsurpassed by anything. Its ability to use vectored thrust in a dogfight makes it, if not the best knife fighter out there, at least viable. The Marines have an excellent aircraft in the Harrier, and use it well.

Answer 8

The Harrier MKII, is a British outfitted aircrfat made by using the corporation British Aerospace. It became into outfitted in 1961 and took its first flight It in 1962 and became into presented to replace the BA structures Vampire fighter/recon airplane. this is widley utilized by using the Royal military and to a lesser quantity, the RAF. It has a Rolls Royce Packard V12 engine, and is the only jet fighter interior the international able to commencing off and landing vertically. The conflicts the airplane has seen action in are the Falklands war, the 1st Gulf war and the Kosovan war. The airplane isn't to get replaced until 2009 and easily then by using the Euro Fighter hurricane, even nonetheless the Harrier is already being phased out by using the BA structures twister Fighter Jet. The airplane continues to be the dominant fighter in use for the Royal military, and could be until its scheduled alternative date of 2009. BA structures and the american corporation McDonnell Douglas have additionally made a joint operations fighter, based on the seems of the F18 Hornet and the F22 Raptor, yet have put in a British made Rolls Royce Packard V12 engine My uncle additionally worked on the engine which permits it take off and land vertically. I additionally recognize lots approximately airplane.

Answer 9

They advantage for the VTOL is the short take off and the short landings. Not hovering like a helicopter. The Harrier is a Vertical Take Off or Landing airplane. Not a Helicopter.

Answer 10

The marines just wanted their own little toy. Think of a harrier more as a really fast helicopter, than a really slow jet. What makes the harrier excel is its vertical take off capabilities like that of a helicopter, not anything else.