He wasn't grounded, which is why he is a pilot.

Big balls..more like

Hmmm, ... that's the function of the A-10, but the US Air Force doesn't seem to care.

@@londomolari5715 Because the 10 got outperformed by numerous aircraft at its own job

@@mpk6664 that was a joke right?

the Italian are still using it but the better much better version with the Harrier II

@@parabelluminvicta8380 Yeah! course it is! does it have reverse????? or surrender mode? Pmsl!

@@sprinter1832 said the english boii that had to be helped for 2 world war got carried by others. Remember dunkirk? yeah thats your country and your country today is even more pathetic. Is Boris doing good after the scandal? talking about others...

I worked with a man who was a Harrier mechanic in the Marines. He said it was a pain to work on, especially when the engine had to be changed (the entire wing had to be removed first). He actually decided not to reenlist because he couldn't get a different assignment.

I headed up many engine changes, in the 70s, on A model Harriers, mostly in the squadron VMA 513. Yes, the wing, A one piece, wing had to be entirely removed before the engine could be removed. But wait, the plane was defueled before that, the controls had to be detached, electric systems were detached, the control exhaust nozzles were taken off, and the whole airplane was put on A cradle, and jacked up at an angle.... And more..it was a pain.

Pilot is a real EXPERT!! Harriers killed sooooo many Indian Navy trainees and sometimes experienced pilots too.... It like playing Tchaikovsky on a piano and flying at the same time!!

@@sojup61 wow, really? never knew that.

@@sojup61 only first class pilots fly complex machines like this, poor training will be exposed in a Harrier

Later, in my career, I was a maintenance test pilot. But not on the Harrier. Your comment about the differences in training between USMC pilots, and British piolts, in regard the crash and fatality rates bears thought. A good comment! I am not sure where I would come down on that. However, in the early 70s, the A model Harrier was flown very aggressively by the Marines, most of whom were all combat proven Viet Nam pilots. Lists of those planes, about 110, were destroyed in crashes in non combat flying.

To be clear, the Marines got about, 110 A model Harriers. More then half were destroyed in non combat flying.

What has happened to our country? It's tragic

Camm passed away 21 months before the first flight of the Harrier.

It was Camm who said that one of the several parameters about designing an aircraft is...politics.

Absolutely!

Not all of them are retired ... I see them flying weekly.

Most of the Brits Harrier II fleet had not been fully upgraded to GR.9s under the Joint Upgrade and Maintenance Programme (JUMP). In fact many of the aircraft were already in long term storage when the decision to sell them to the United States was made. Reportedly only 40 remained operational at the time.

@@jaylancaster5419 they are in British service

@@AA-xo9uw Most of them were in storage as there was little need for them, but were still in relatively good condition. The RAF and RN had drawn back the Harrier force to two frontline squadrons (1 RAF and 1 Fleet Air Arm Squadron) and one OCU squadron, each with 9 operational aircraft (27 overall). So there is a reason why only a handful were still operational, the rest were either reserves, in maintenance or were older GR.7s which had all been withdrawn back in April 2010. The Harriers were retired completely in December 2010 and then sold off in November 2011

@@Frserthegreenengine I'm in the US, and the closest military base to me has five squadrons of AV-8Bs in service (one being a training squadron).

The f 35 b has vtol

@@RichardMontgomeryYT more svtol.

The break up of British aircraft industry was a grave mistake. Competition is the key to innovation. It never pays to reduce such competitiveness, but the pathetic British government tend to make this same mistake time and time again. A German company director stated that German industry was based on a British concept from just after the war. Small is beautiful. He reckons that is why Germany is still successful in manufacturing but the UK has lost its way. Obviously Germany has many massive companies, but they also still "contract out" for many things and have kept up that concept.

ppfffffft swingwings are cooler

yeah, and the "Marines" harrier shown in action in that move True Lies, definitely captures the badassary of that exciting plane.

Hated by the Argies :)

The Spanish have/had them too, but in their case they called them "Matadors".

@@SpikeF14 😆😆😆!

Loved by some, Not loved by people who had worked on them and then got to work on stuff that was better. My Brother worked on Harriers, Tornado's and Jaguars in his RAF Career and he calls the Harrier a Leaping Heap.

@@richardvernon317 They say the other iconic (and beautiful) fighter, the F-14 Tomcat, was a nightmare to work on as well.

yet we sadly lost some there. Can't quite remember, but i think they were lost in bad weather as they hadn't been radar upgraded. Anyone in the know?

@@theotherside8258 I seem to recall that weather claimed a few Naval harriers. I think one RAF one was shot down by AA fire.

@@MG-bs5mr Are you really sure one was shot down by enemy fire?

@@matthewbaynham6286 no, not sure. But I vaguely recall a GR1 getting downed by AA fire and the pilot evading the Argentinians for much of the rest of the conflict.

Correction: I wanted to remind myself so ... the RAF variant was the GR3 not GR1. And five Harriers were shot down. 2 RN, 3 RAF. One of those were hit by fire from the ground and the pilot ejected later so 4 losses to AA could be argued.

My bro was a Harrier pilot out of Wittering. I went to their Summer Ball and all the guests had been ushered outside for a quick display by my bro. Supposed to go across the front, he decided instead to scare the crap out of everyone by coming at full belt right over back of the Mess. Chaos, drinks everywhere. But.. that took him low level over the village, a big No-No. So, he was in front of the Station Commander in dress uniform for an official dressing down. After getting a strip torn off him, he was dismissed. As he reached the door, the CO said 'Steve.. that was effing fantastic!'

Agree. He has a great style. Ask him to to the F18, flying support roles, carrier landings, problem management, etc

He's a top bloke, always polite and cordial.

Well said. This was a fantastic presentation- I used to be an engineer and it was a joy to listen to!

Aaahhhh, but not as good as wiping out an entire country with the stroke of a pen... (Monty Burns, - The Simpsons)

95% of the fast jet world jockeys are exactly as you say. Some were arrogant and so full of themselves, but you have to remember what it took out of the pilot flying these leaping heaps. Especially the early ones.

@@tonyhaynes9080 when I was a kid a harrier pilot lived opposite us and I hated him even at that age. So, so arrogant. Also stole my advent calendar to give his kid

@@Ukraineaissance2014 What a rotter

i wasnt expecting to find you under this video

It really was cool, but the 35 is a huge technological leap forward. Shame it isnt British.

@@sensibledriver933 It's partly British. The UK was the program's biggest co-developer, after the US.

As a young person I hoped for a Harrier demonstration group like the Thunderbirds or the Blue Angels. I'm sure the ability to manually vector thrust in forward flight would've led to some interesting maneuvers

Sorry you are suffering from Overanagraming.Hope they find a cure soon.GBFN.

@@christophercook723 pogue

@@AA-xo9uw HilLOC JFH NFG ATAL? Achronims. FAW means William always gets shot at? Forward Air Reconisance Terminated. AOK? TTFN.

@@christophercook723 FOAD SH.

Commander

Kept the Tornado fleet in the air for nearly 10 years. Tornado fleet was bigger than the Harrier fleet anyway.

Tornado couldn't match the GR9s sortie rates, but as a platform the Tornado with RAPTOR ticked more boxes when it came to chopping a type. Egg on face moment was Libya when they had to tank Typhoons and Tornados to and from theatre from Italy while they were stripping out and dismantling the recently refurbed Ark and Harriers that could have sat 20 miles off the coast

@@c00sto Oh Dear, another WAFU fool who thinks that Warships run on air!!! A Carrier would not be there by itself, it would be part of a battle group with escort destroyers, frigates, RFA logistics ships and Tankers. All of the Warships would have at least 2 Gas Turbines and two Generators running 24/7. Dependant of air temperatures and weather, Harriers may have had to dump weapons before landing. Time out from Flight Ops would be required for the Carrier to refuel with AVCAT, its own fuel, plus weapons, Food and other stores (the Magazines on the CVS were not that large). The RAF took around 4 days to deploy Typhoons and 5 days to deploy Tornados to Italy (plus launched missions from the UK). When the RAF were not flying, their only costs were Hotel bills!!! Fuel costs on a Tanker and the Transit are nowhere near that of a Carrier Battle Group and the Harriers would need a Tanker to do any time on station anyway.

Just over 10 years ago the UK sold 72 Harrier jump jets for 180 million dollars. And the US is going to use them well into 2025. And are carriers are waiting around for F-35s which is going to take until 2025 until we get 50 jet's unbelievable. And we have ordered 74 F-35B Lighting jets. And the UK is the only level one partner with every F-35 made is 16% British Engineered. Just hurry up with the 138 we was going to have.

@Gareth Fairclough Tornado was quite capable of doing the mission of the Harrier by 2010 as regards Close Air Support. Want to fly slow, put the wings forward. Want to shoot a gun at a target, GR Mk 4 has a 27mm Cannon. Harrier GR 5/7/9 didn't have a gun as the 25mm Aden cannon deigned for it was cancelled because they had blown all of the R+D budget on designing it and it didn't work reliably. Data Link between JTAC Forward Air Controller and Tornado, that was fitted by 2010. Guy in the back could deal with the finding of the target and designation, while the pilot flew the aircraft. Harrier had to use CRV7 rockets because they didn't have a gun. Maverick on an UOR and 540lb Paveway IV. Tornado could carry 3 Brimstones, 3 PW Mk IV and a targeting pod or do wide area Recce with a Raptor pod that fed data directly to the ground. Plus the Tonka can do all of the long range interdiction stuff. OK you need a bigger runway, but concreate is cheap and a long runway allow operation of large cargo aircraft.

And don’t forget the Russians couldn’t master this and need lift engines!

Yea but as it turns out a seperate device for upward thrust is the way to go. Marvelous for its time however the vectoring system imposed its own restrictions and compromises...

@@stillsalty947 A separate device for upwards thrust adds parasitic weight, ie. weight that does nothing in level flight. The Harrier's nozzles weighed very little.

@@earl_gray totally different system of doing things

@@owensmith7530 "The Harrier's nozzles weighed very little." Yet helped to produce the notorious and troublesome compressor, aka pop, stalls that the Pegasus is infamous for.

VMA-223 and VMA-231 continue to operate the AV-8B.

Is it a bird? Is it plane? No, it's a Hawker Siddeley Harrier!

who says the Germans don't have a sense of humour?? Glad he was ok.

@@smithy280663 Was a West German Pilot flying a Kestrel during the Tri nation VSTOL trials at RAF West Ranyham in 1964/65. Aircraft was not quite a Harrier.

IIRC, the German pilot was in fact Gerhard Barkhorn, and he said "That's 302 allied aircraft now"...

"One German pilot who had shot down 20 British aircraft during the war got in the harrier took of in vetol got in to bother with the plane tipping over he ejected safely. He walked over and said that's 21 British aircraft now."(sic) Actually that was Gerhard "Gerd" Barkhorn, number two ace in the Luftwaffe behind Erich Hartmann, with 301 kills. As a Colonel he crashed while attempting to hover a Kestrel FGA.1 on 13 October 1963 and as he was exiting the wreckage is reported to have said '"Drei hundert und zwei!"(302!).

One 800 Squadron SHAR pilot attempted to VIFF trying to down a Pucara which didn't work out. VIFFing was part of the Marine Corps Harrier training syllabus but wasn't an approved operational tactic for RAF and RN Harrier/SHAR pilots.

xD

It's been replaced by the F-35B

It's not madness when the F-35B can do BETTER than the harrier

yeah obviously the F-35B is way better than a harrier. what I find a bit sad is that the americans retired the F-14 in 2006, because swingwings are awesome. it's very funny though that the F-14 was only ever used by the US and iran, and now iran is the only user. somehow they've still managed to fly some as late as the war in syria, despite presumably getting no parts for maintenance from the US since 1979. well, at least they haven't been revealed to have been part of the american arms sales to iran of the iran-contra affair as far as I'm aware...

@@Ass_of_Amalek Iranian F-14s were never an issue. War is a game of paper/rock/scissors, so you need to provide the full range of weapon superiority in order to win the war (and iran definitely could never do that).

@@pedestrianrights1257 _"Iranian F-14s were never an issue. "_ I don't think he suggested they were... He was just disappointed that the USN retired them and curious as to how Iran managed to keep them flying without US help.

Did anyone there ever bother to mention the major influx of capital compliments of the American taxpayers via the MWDP when touting that "British" product?

Still a British product. Even if partially funded under MWDP.

Still is ... I see them flying several times a week.

Tornado was a better aircraft at fighting wars!!! Flew a lot more combat missions than the Harrier ever did.

It was a financial decision made in 2011, when the UK was still recovering from the GFC. The MoD couldn't afford to keep both aircraft and the Tornado was needed more. Also, the MoD decided to decommission 2 of the RN 3 aircraft carriers (Invincible and Ark Royal) in 2011, with the 3rd (Illustrious) serving only 3 more years as a helicopter carrier before also being decommissioned, so there was no requirement to keep the Harriers in service beyond 2011. Instead, 2 new (QE class) aircraft carriers were under construction, which were intended to carry the F-35, so the Harrier would inevitably be replaced once these were ready.

The F35 is also a direct upgrade over the Harrier for primary duty, namely naval support, command & control, and superior VTOL capabilities that are far easier to learn & master. It’s a testament to just how good is the Harrier that it’s still in wide service today, but it’s also a statement of Britain’s cutting edge military that we can jump in to fifth generation aircraft with two feet.

@@Jaxck77 "and superior VTOL capabilities"(sic) The F-35B is a STOVL platform not VTOL. There was no KPP for the JSF to be capable of vertical takeoff. The fact that the F-35B can is simply gravy but it is not an operational maneuver.

@@richardvernon317 not quite. The Harrier were used in wars just as much as the Tornado was. Harriers were used in the Falklands whereas the Tornado had not yet entered service. Apart from the First Gulf War, the Harrier had been used in every conflict that the British was involved in until it's retirement. So both were extremely capable of fighting wars. The Harrier was arguably more versatile as it was could be used on carriers (albeit the Carriers did require defence from destroyers and support vessels but the extra capabilities it offered made this an acceptable tradeoff) and thus could attack targets where Tornados could not and the Harriers also had a greater serviceability rate. The Tornado on the other hand had greater range and greater payloads and thus had a wider range of ground attack options, most notably Storm Shadow and Brimstone (though the Harrier was mean to carry them too but was retired before they were cleared to carry it). Both of them were just as good at fighting wars as each other, but in different ways.

Being humble must come from years of actual war experience. I see plenty of interviews where ex-military are well mannered. I also am amazed by how UK was able to develop such technological marvel. And the fact that USSR cancelled their own vtol attempt with Yak-36 is even more satisfying and proves how high the bar was set.

@@amarewskyy7341 The Yak-36 was followed by the operational Yak-38 and the experimental Yak-41.

The US Marines took every plane we had efeter our deranged Govt to sell the lot. They still value them too, well there were still around 100 still in 2018

You must be on drugs

@@Cheeseatingjunglista There are still 3 active AV-8B Harrier squadrons in the Marine Corps, but most of them are Boeing AV-8B+ with radars.

@@N75911_ Just like the upgrades that allow B-52s to still be used in the modern era, if a military aircraft stands still without upgrades, it is soon shot down in combat - its also a Boeing project as it was originally McDonnell that worked with BAe to build the Harrier 2 back in the 80s

@@Cheeseatingjunglista BAe worked with McDonnell Douglas at the tail end of the redesign as the Brits abandoned the Harrier II from 1975-1981.

Most Soviet Frontal Aviation aircraft had/have rough field capability because their intent was to go for the airfirlelds in any conflict. (Correct me if I am wrong) The Indians used Soviet dibber bombs to crater Pakistani airfields in 1965.