Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories, and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes Join this channel ➤ th-cam.com/channels/TTqBgYdkmFogITlPDM0M4A.htmljoin ➤ IG: instagram.com/dronescapesvideos/ ➤ TWITTER (X): tinyurl.com/m86k2ypf
From P.1127 (which I read about as a kid) to AV8B, I've been impressed with 1) 1-engine/4-nozzles design elegance 2) seat-of-the-pants reaction controls at low airspeeds 3) the combat record of airframes in the family tree. If I were a man of means, I'd fly circuits in an unloaded AV8B every day to focus my wandering mind :)
The Harrier, and to a greater degree, the Harrier II, is a plane that does not get the credit it deserves. We produce fancy planes like the F-22 and F-35 that rarely see combat, but the Harrier and Harrier II have well established combat records and have served with distinction. The type has about 21 air to air kills vs 0 air to air losses (Harrier) and thousands upon thousands of combat sorties. Even recently the old war horse has been shooting down Houthi drones. The F-22 has dropped a couple of bombs and shot down a balloon but is worshipped, while the Harrier and Harrier II have been an effective presence on the battle field for 45 years and is still serving and get little acknowledgement or the excellence they have demonstrated as a truly effective combat aircraft.
Wow! Amazing documentary! Ive always liked the harrier jump jet since finding out about it and seeing it back in the day it was was revolutionary air craft technology and for a longtime before its inception seemed science fiction but as with alot of cases becomes science reality i know that the harrier is some what semi retired and has stoped production of which forr reasons im not to sure why i dont know if its due to mordern advancements in a similar vtol aircraft and currently doing research in seeing the current and next generation of the these types of aircraft..
Imagine being in a boardroom full of university educated masters in aeronautical engineering and the head of the company hasn't even had any technical training. Sir Stanley Cam wouldn't have been invited if it weren't for the fact it was his company.
Thank you for a comprehensive look at the development and deployment of the Harrier. Your American pronunciation of various English words is endearing and humorous. Eg: Royale instead of 'Roil'. Ports Mouth instead of 'Portsmith'. The English love to clip or swallow the ends of their words while Americans like to get the full enjoyment out of every letter. This is NOT a criticism of your delivery, merely an observation of two cultures sharing the same language. Keep true to yourself.
Although having advantages in takeoff and recovery the Harrier was inferior to conventional carrier aircraft due to its short range as was demonstrated in the Falklands with Harriers only being able to engage and destroy enemy aircraft only after they'd done their damage
With the advancement of modern tec exterior coatings wing shaping etc and a heads up cockpit display this would make the F35 look stupid with the right engine even now It should be the UK's equivalent of the A10
The fact it was developed before computers... Before fly by wire. Normal flight is balanced between the aerodynamic forces and movement of control surfaces. VTOL has zero surface force at take off, by definition. So totally unstable, purely manual control using the jet outriggers or jet deflectors....and no precedent for training like the pilot said. So control was the real triumph, on top of the power requirements. The absence of safety systems initially, especially at low altitude, meant the test pilots were gods of courage. And each evolution tried different configurations. So there was no standard procedure for experimental aircraft. Even the function of jet engines with no forward speed has risks such as ground debris and reingestion of hot exhaust gases... Not what you want when relying on that engine to avoid plummeting to earth...
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories, and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes
Join this channel ➤ th-cam.com/channels/TTqBgYdkmFogITlPDM0M4A.htmljoin
➤ IG: instagram.com/dronescapesvideos/
➤ TWITTER (X): tinyurl.com/m86k2ypf
The Harrier was an engineering masterpiece. I loved watching, them fly.
I was fortunate enough to see a Harrier’s flight maneuvers in 1994 or 1995 at the Van Nuys air show. It was awesome 🤩
This beautiful bird used to come to airborne in Eastbourne every year
Sad we never got to see it's super sonic successor the P.1154 it would have been interesting to see it be competitive against the Yak-31.
The English have good engineers. Everything that they make and want it to be the best is the best!
The big fan is used in forward thrust so it has/had high bypass turbofan fuel efficiency. The big cross section limited its speed to transonic only.
Amazing aircraft
From P.1127 (which I read about as a kid) to AV8B, I've been impressed with 1) 1-engine/4-nozzles design elegance 2) seat-of-the-pants reaction controls at low airspeeds 3) the combat record of airframes in the family tree. If I were a man of means, I'd fly circuits in an unloaded AV8B every day to focus my wandering mind :)
British engineers also invented the P.1154 that would have made the Harrier supersonic but the politicians but a budget on it as usual
The Harrier, and to a greater degree, the Harrier II, is a plane that does not get the credit it deserves. We produce fancy planes like the F-22 and F-35 that rarely see combat, but the Harrier and Harrier II have well established combat records and have served with distinction. The type has about 21 air to air kills vs 0 air to air losses (Harrier) and thousands upon thousands of combat sorties. Even recently the old war horse has been shooting down Houthi drones. The F-22 has dropped a couple of bombs and shot down a balloon but is worshipped, while the Harrier and Harrier II have been an effective presence on the battle field for 45 years and is still serving and get little acknowledgement or the excellence they have demonstrated as a truly effective combat aircraft.
No mention of Michel Wibault's Gyropter? Bristol Siddeley based the Pegasus on Wibault's design.
Legend 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
Very interesting documentary about the harrier jet
The best documentary on the Harrier i’ve seen to date. PS we say “P eleven twentyseven”
VTOL ..very useful when on an aircraft carrier
Wow! Amazing documentary! Ive always liked the harrier jump jet since finding out about it and seeing it back in the day it was was revolutionary air craft technology and for a longtime before its inception seemed science fiction but as with alot of cases becomes science reality i know that the harrier is some what semi retired and has stoped production of which forr reasons im not to sure why i dont know if its due to mordern advancements in a similar vtol aircraft and currently doing research in seeing the current and next generation of the these types of aircraft..
When I was in the Navy the first Marine jump jet was on the same ship ,USS Gaum
Thumbnail reference?
Esse.foi.muinto.bem.feito.engeeiros.mak.11.poder.tirar.o.chapeu..para.voçes.enge...top.
Imagine being in a boardroom full of university educated masters in aeronautical engineering and the head of the company hasn't even had any technical training. Sir Stanley Cam wouldn't have been invited if it weren't for the fact it was his company.
There was a fatal Argentinian ground fire shoot down of a Harrier over the Falklands.
His name was Nick Taylor.
No air to air losses though
2 SHARs and 3 GR.3s were lost to ground fire during the Falklands skirmish.
Thank you for a comprehensive look at the development and deployment of the Harrier.
Your American pronunciation of various English words is endearing and humorous.
Eg: Royale instead of 'Roil'.
Ports Mouth instead of 'Portsmith'.
The English love to clip or swallow the ends of their words while Americans like to get the full enjoyment out of every letter.
This is NOT a criticism of your delivery, merely an observation of two cultures sharing the same language.
Keep true to yourself.
M'en Fous !
T'es jaloux !
A VTOL version of the Fw 190??? Whaaaaat the hell!? I‘m outta here.
Although having advantages in takeoff and recovery the Harrier was inferior to conventional carrier aircraft due to its short range as was demonstrated in the Falklands with Harriers only being able to engage and destroy enemy aircraft only after they'd done their damage
Theory of gravuty is top secret otherwise we get missile attacked
With the advancement of modern tec exterior coatings wing shaping etc and a heads up cockpit display this would make the F35 look stupid with the right engine even now It should be the UK's equivalent of the A10
The fact it was developed before computers... Before fly by wire.
Normal flight is balanced between the aerodynamic forces and movement of control surfaces.
VTOL has zero surface force at take off, by definition. So totally unstable, purely manual control using the jet outriggers or jet deflectors....and no precedent for training like the pilot said.
So control was the real triumph, on top of the power requirements.
The absence of safety systems initially, especially at low altitude, meant the test pilots were gods of courage.
And each evolution tried different configurations. So there was no standard procedure for experimental aircraft.
Even the function of jet engines with no forward speed has risks such as ground debris and reingestion of hot exhaust gases... Not what you want when relying on that engine to avoid plummeting to earth...