US Marine Corps Buy All Remaining RAF Harriers
US Marine Corps Buy All Remaining RAF Harriers
Author
Discussion

GrahamG

Original Poster:

1,091 posts

296 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Have just read that the 74 stored RAF Harriers have been bought by the USMC who intend to keep them in service until the middle of the next decade!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/16/harrier-f...


Edited by GrahamG on Wednesday 16th November 12:57

Soovy

35,829 posts

300 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all


They got some sense. Unlike our gubberment.


y2blade

56,318 posts

244 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Good news smile

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Soovy said:
They got some sense. Unlike our gubberment.
More money, more like.

We had a choice, Harriers or Tornados. The Harrier was the less capable aircraft, so it went.

LotusOmega375D

9,313 posts

182 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
I like this comment:

"We're taking advantage of all the money the Brits have spent on them," he said. "It's like we're buying a car with maybe 15,000 miles on it. These are very good platforms."

Perhaps they'd like a cut-price carrier or two to fly them off!

Nice to see that our budget cuts are helping to fund the defences of our allies.


Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
LotusOmega375D said:
I like this comment:

"We're taking advantage of all the money the Brits have spent on them," he said. "It's like we're buying a car with maybe 15,000 miles on it. These are very good platforms."

Perhaps they'd like a cut-price carrier or two to fly them off!

Nice to see that our budget cuts are helping to fund the defences of our allies.
So they can bomb our lads next time we are on joint operations smile

Silent1

19,762 posts

264 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Like I said a few months back

Mr Dave

3,233 posts

224 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Soovy said:
They got some sense. Unlike our gubberment.
More money, more like.

We had a choice, Harriers or Tornados. The Harrier was the less capable aircraft, so it went.
Get out!

This is a discussion about Harriers, it is not a place for logic or facts.

Elroy Blue

8,838 posts

221 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
They're being sold for parts, not for use as complete airframes.

DamienB

1,211 posts

248 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Cost of one new Harrier: $30M
Cost of 74 preloved and extensively upgraded Harriers: $50M

The USMC are getting the bargain of the century. The UK taxpayer is being VBRJed on a massive scale, as usual.

Cost savings due to retiring our Harriers: £900M

Now depending on which way you want your piss to boil, that £900M could be paid for by getting all the money back from benefit cheats (just one year's worth would pay for all those years of Harrier operations we now cannot have), or by not giving it as aid to countries which are nuclear-armed and more than capable of looking after themselves, such as India.

eharding

14,648 posts

313 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
DamienB said:
Now depending on which way you want your piss to boil, that £900M could be paid for by getting all the money back from benefit cheats (just one year's worth would pay for all those years of Harrier operations we now cannot have), or by not giving it as aid to countries which are nuclear-armed and more than capable of looking after themselves, such as India.
I thought you were spending the benefit-cheat money on unscrapping Nimrod, and the Indian Eurofighter bung overseas aid on unscrapping a couple of aircraft carriers?

Elroy Blue

8,838 posts

221 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
'Aid' of £12 billion a year would do an awful lot of good in this country.

Mr_B

10,480 posts

272 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
If you have a fleet of retired aircraft that you can't afford to run and which only a couple of people still do, not sure you are really going to get top price. What would you do with them if the Americans said no thanks ?

Mojocvh

16,837 posts

291 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
They'll be quite handy over Iran and Syria once the Yanks have bolted on their standard fit of saddle chuff and fluff launchers, taken out the intergrated air defences and have gained and sustained total air superiority, handy but a slow as f##k manpad sponge.


aeropilot

40,519 posts

256 months

Wednesday 16th November 2011
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
They're being sold for parts, not for use as complete airframes.
Not what the USMC/USN are saying.

I agree with the theory being banded about that this maybe the USMC 'Plan B' in anticpation of (or prewarned knowledge) of the US DoD chopping the USMC's F-35B programme wink


Junior Bianno

1,400 posts

222 months

Thursday 17th November 2011
quotequote all
Looks like many yanks aren't overjoyed with the idea either

http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2011/11/14/navy-y...

"How the mighty have fallen" - buying our castoffs.


Hooli

32,278 posts

229 months

Thursday 17th November 2011
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
'Aid' of £12 billion a year would do an awful lot of good in this country.
Total agreement here.

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Thursday 17th November 2011
quotequote all
How compatible are the RAF Harrier GR9s to the latest versions used by the US Marines?

GrahamG

Original Poster:

1,091 posts

296 months

Thursday 17th November 2011
quotequote all
Pretty certain too that none of the Harriers up for sale date back as far as 1980 (as claimed in the TIME article above) - thought they came into service closer to 1990?

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Thursday 17th November 2011
quotequote all
The first new generation Harriers (the GR5s) entered service with thr RAF around 1986/87. The GR7s (which were upgraded to GR9) were delivered in the 90s.

Ginetta G15 may have more precise and accurate dates.