If you were gonna buy a 1/48 Harrier, Which One Would it Be?

...and behind schedule.

This is an interesting website:

One should bear in mind that there are a contingent of Aussies that feel that the ONLY fighter on the planet that will meet Australian defense (defence?..) requirements is F-22, and this site was set up by some of those defense analysts specifically in an attempt to prove their point.

There is some very good and credible air warfare analysis presented here...some of it was SO credible that I notice it's been removed since the site was first launched...

yeah, yer probably right...

That's cool...seems tail heavy, but that could be worked out. I really like this concept, as rotary winged things go.

In a test of F-22's against F-15's ... the Eagles were taken out before they even knew what happened. Stealth is overrated ?

Chris

So now you give your full blown explanation ... instead of harping on the safety single engine issue.

Maybe you could do that from the begining.

Chris

Yes - and it depends on the conditions of the test 1v1, armament, ground forces, GCI, which flavor F-15s, etc...stealth is overrated. So are radars.

Besides, an F-22 can rip the pants off anything in close...nothing compares to it, but that's not because of stealth.

I wasn't harping - it was just a first and most readily available example to bring to the discourse.

I always assume people can think and expound for themselves and that I don't need to spoon-feed them...maybe I need to rethink that...just for some people.

Can you back up here Enzo. You and Rufus seem to be making the point that a VSTOL fleet concept is obsolete right ? Then Rufus states his " the Harrier in not a fighter " stuff. I point out that the Harrier kicked ass in the Falklands. And then you seem to poo poo the Harriers relevance in the Falklands war.

Am I right so far ?

Let's look at the Harriers record in the Falklands. ( following quotes from a Falklands war site )

=2E..had the British not had aircraft with the capabilities of the Harrier (V/STOL, high reliability, and high availability) and the two small ships to operate them, it is unlikely the United Kingdom would have committed itself to hostilities in the South Atlantic. The Harrier aircraft performed a variety of missions in the South Atlantic, but the interceptor role gained the aircraft its acclaim. Accounts of the number of enemy aircraft destroyed vary between 20 and 31 but equally importantis the large number of enemy sorties broken up before they reached British forces. It is safe to say the aircraft played a significant role in reducing the Argentine air threat to the battle group.

The British had reason to be confident in their aircraft. In simulated combat, kill ratios of 2:1 had been claimed by 899 squadron against the U.S. Air Force F-5E and ratios above 1:1 over the F-15 and F-16.

The 28 Sea Harriers flew more than 1,200 sorties in 44 days and achieved an exceptionally high availability rate -- almost 90 percent. In air-to-air combat the Sea Harriers destroyed at least twenty aircraft (16 with the Sidewinder air-to-air missile), four with ADEN 30mm cannon.

Chris

my machine gun buddy has a czech one, prolly the same. nice wood, good bluing, sharp stamp?

bookmarked so i can read in full.

you know heinlein's definition of an elephant? a mouse built to mil spec.

looked fast. medvac or insertion, i would think.

OH ... so first the F-22 would take you out before you even knew what happened. So stealth isn't overrated is it ? ( well of course it is because the test was rigged right )

AND THEN ... if you did manage to get in close to an F-22 it would rip you apart.

Gosh ... sounds like a stealthy Navy F-35 would kick ass. Yeah sure it's not as stealthy as an F-22 ... but the same concept.

Chris

All I remember is that when you could actually still go to a gun show in CA, back in the late 80s, the things were selling anywhere from around $200 to $400 depending on where they came from. There were a flood of Egyptian ones out there, but the ones of choice came from central Europe.

Yeah - really nice bluing. Also recall hearing that a lot of the parts that were roll-formed on the Egyptian ones were actually machined on the European ones.

Really ... Pre -Falkland's war ...

The British had reason to be confident in their aircraft. In simulated combat, kill ratios of 2:1 had been claimed by 899 squadron against the U.S. Air Force F-5E and ratios above 1:1 over the F-15 and F-16's.

Chris

There's a wealth of info there - and some real nice drawings and photos that a modeler might find useful. Also a goodly deal of insight as to how a nation selects a platform...though it may be a bit one-sided in viewpoint.

Given that the Aussies just bought Super Hornet I'm back to my original observation on how much they may or may not have left to spend on something else.

...by committee. Damn Democrats...

Yup. Goodly amount of rotor lift, proven combat platform and basic tech, and still trying to figure out how fast it can really go.

Putting the CG in the right place, or refining the control authority between tail lift component and counter torque should be an easy enough problem to solve.

Phhhhhttttt !

First it's " The U.S. Navy won't stand for a single engine ... it's not safe "

Then you launch straight into " stealth is overrated. "

Oh cute. Yeah I'm supposed to read your mind.

Chris