Talk:British Aerospace Sea Harrier/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Weaponry question

I note that the article page lists the SHAR FA2 as fitted for WE.177 nuclear bombs. Is there any actual hard evidence for this? Most other (and fairly scanty) sources for this say that the wiring looms and safety switches were installed only on the FRS.1, and that FA2 never had these fitted. Other reliable official sources say that the 20 WE.177 strike assigned bombs were transferred to the RAF with the Buccaneers when Ark Royal decommissioned, and there is no evidence as yet that replacements were ever obtained when the Navy re-equipped with SHAR on the new smaller carriers. The remaining 43 weapons were assigned by the Navy to anti-sub deployment aboard helicopters, although there is evidence from reliable official sources that onboard armourers could quickly convert these to use as strike weapons by fast jets. Anyone out there with some answers? 86.146.194.103 (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

IIRC, the Sea Harrier equipped for WE.177 can be recognised by the inner-right underwing pylon being fixed to the wing and, unlike the other three pylons, it is not removable. IIRC, this pylon is permanently fixed to the aircraft's structure and wired-in to the aircraft's wiring loom so as to reduce the number of electrical connections and hence improve reliability for the WE.177. Whether the FA2 was so-fitted I don't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.216.123 (talk) 19:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

As most of the FA2s were refitted FRS1s, not new airframes, it's possible the hardware for WE.177s was left in place on those aircraft. 200rabbits (talk) 03:52, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Good diagram showing its engine

This image, even this are quite interesting and shows its engine along with the 4 nozzle locations. If we could make our own diagram showing this? Does anyone else think that it would be good addition to this article? Then we could see to making such a diagram, I'm not sure how to go about it myself but people interested can speak up. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:41, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I have added it. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

RNAS Culdrose SFDO taxiing?

At RNAS Culdrose I heard talk and seen photographs of Sea Harriers based at Culdrose taxiing under there own power , I know that there are 12 sea harriers based at Culdrose with 2 T8 trainers . I also know from photographs that ZE962, ZH802 and T8 ZB603 are able to taxi. So how many can taxi and what is there purpose all invincible class aircraft carriers are out of service? Also does this make them still in service as they are operational? Vulcan44 (talk) 18:00, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

References

Not really in service as we would define it they are just used as training aids to teach flightdeck handling skills, without a carrier it is probably more important to retain the deck handing skills for the future. MilborneOne (talk) 18:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Service in Gulf War 1

The opening sentence of the second para states the aircraft was used in both Gulf Wars. I cannot find the Sea Harrier in any Order of Battle. Does anyone have a good reference, otherwise I shall remove any reference to this. Kitbag (talk) 14:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Foreign customers

Hi,

I though the Harrier was also used by the US navy, built under licence, and apparently theirs was just about supersonic?

Simon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.122.49.85 (talk) 12:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

They US Marines do operate Harriers but they are not based on the "Sea Harrier", refer to Hawker Siddeley Harrier for the older Marine versions and McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II for the current aircraft. MilborneOne (talk) 19:23, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Comment

All variants of the Harrier will go nicely supersonic in a dive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.18.228 (talk) 17:48, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

How many SHARs lost to ground fire: one or two ??

The introduction reads that one SHAR was lost to ground fire, yet under the section Op History >> Falklands War it reads that two were lost to ground fire. Do we have a contradiction here ??Wikkileaker (talk) 14:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I see that it reads "enemy ground fire". So one was lost to friendly ground fire ?? hahaha...Wikkileaker (talk)

Some kind of error there it seems. I corrected that to two to match Op history section. --Finlayson (talk) 18:21, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Up for deletion Andy Auld (pilot)

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Andy Auld (pilot) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

I've improved sources, but more always helps. Important Falklands War squadron commander and successful pilot. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:54, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Untitled

- Made a small edit to correct propellor driven transports to aircraft, as the Argentinians operated the Pucara attack craft from Stanley and Goose Green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.17.61 (talk) 13:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)