Harrier GR7 & GR9 Confirmed

[Hummingbird]

Gr.7 and 9 had 2 X 25mm Aden cannons I believe.

 

As far as I've read they were cancelled in 1999 though. Were they ever used operationally?

[mr_mojo97]

Found some interesting info about it here

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSs3ObJYVWR2gAjW.A3YlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEzbWNhY3NpBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM0BHZ0aWQDVEFVSzAxXzEEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1451595291/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fforum.keypublishing.com%2fshowthread.php%3f62971-Harrier-GR-7-9-lack-of-gunpod/RK=0/RS=iO8DYstqRvmCWZz8Y7iHmxUdcho-

[Buznee]

With the harrier I'm very excited about it's application in the dcs environment. You could have an improvised forward operating base setup on a road with some supplies and weapons. The aircraft could be covered underneath a tarp and require you to do a short takeoff from the road. I've seen some videos and documentation showing this as a huge advantage to the harrier. Another mission could be the airstrip was bombed grounding a large amount of the strike aircraft. The harrier could be the last hope for victory :)

 

Edited December 31, 2015 by Buznee

[Harry.R]

UK modern Harriers had no cannon unlike the Gr.3 above, although they flew with the cannon pods fitted, but if removed strakes were fitted in place of the pods. Various 'options' available. ;)

Edited December 31, 2015 by Harry.R

[Highwayman-Ed]

YAY HARRIER!

[iLOVEwindmills]

UK modern Harriers had no cannon unlike the Gr.3 above, although they flew with the cannon pods fitted, but if removed strakes were fitted in place of the pods. Various 'options' available. ;)

 

So could they or could they not? It seems the 25mm never came together, and wasn't used due to a variety of technical issues. 30mm Aden wasn't carried by them operationally. But I can't quite understand if that was technically not possible, or just because they wanted to use the mounting points for other equipment.

[Harry.R]

So could they or could they not? It seems the 25mm never came together, and wasn't used due to a variety of technical issues. 30mm Aden wasn't carried by them operationally. But I can't quite understand if that was technically not possible, or just because they wanted to use the mounting points for other equipment.

 

They couldn't . The pods were maintained but no cannon fitted. Happy new year btw.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Harry.R

[iLOVEwindmills]

Thanks, but now I read this post and the last line just adds to more confusion.

 

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?62971-Harrier-GR-7-9-lack-of-gunpod&p=1013475#post1013475

 

And happy new year to you as well.

[Harry.R]

Sorry, I can't see where the confusion is? The gun wasn't fitted. The gun pod that surrounded the gun was a standard fit. No guns. As much as they might have wanted guns.

[Hummingbird]

Been thinking it's gonna be fun testing how well the Harrier performs in terms of maneuverability.

 

Based just on a few specifications and what I can see with my naked eye I think the Harrier is going to surprise most with how maneuverable it is at slow speeds (and no I'm not talking about VIFF'ing lol)

[Bullfrog_]

Been thinking it's gonna be fun testing how well the Harrier performs in terms of maneuverability.

 

Based just on a few specifications and what I can see with my naked eye I think the Harrier is going to surprise most with how maneuverable it is at slow speeds (and no I'm not talking about VIFF'ing lol)

 

 

I remember reading that in some harrier pilots would put it in VTOL mode (I don't know what the technical term is) in combat daring the Falklands war.

 

I don't know how much merit that has though :lol:

[Harry.R]

Have a look here..

[ame=

]

[/ame]

[Bullfrog_]

I guess the technical term would be "Nozzles" :megalol:

 

 

Yeah, that's what I was talking about... God it looks fun to fly

[Dahlbeck]

I remember reading that in some harrier pilots would put it in VTOL mode (I don't know what the technical term is) in combat daring the Falklands war.

 

I don't know how much merit that has though

That's VIFF, like what the guy you quoted was talking about. :-)

 

Vectoring In Forward Flight.

[Harry.R]

Not much use if your caught BVR, but it'll be ideal for forcing a less experienced Flanker driver to overshoot ;)

[Hummingbird]

No as mentioned I am not talking about VIFF'ing as I consider that mostly useless in combat, but rather about actual maneuverability in forward flight without manipulation of the exhaust nozzles.

 

The Harrier II (Gr.5,7,9 and AV-8B), features a thick supercritical wing with automatically actuating split maneuver flaps, LERX and a very high amount of thrust to weight & drag ratio at slow to medium speeds. Thus I expect it to be quite a beast below 800 km/h.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Hummingbird

[Hummingbird]

As suspected the Harrier's maneuverability at slow speeds is very impressive.

 

AV-8B Harrier ITR & STR at SL with 4x AIM-9 missiles and 6x pylons (configuration 10):

Max ITR = 19 deg/sec @ Mach 0.66

Max STR = 12 deg/sec @ Mach 0.38

Climb rate = 13,750 ft/min

Stall speed = 121 kts (104 kts power on)

 

In clean condition with no pylons the above is massively increased to approx (configuration 2):

 

Max ITR = ~23 deg/sec @ Mach 0.66

Max STR = ~16 deg/sec @ Mach 0.38

Climb rate = 18,950 ft/min

Stall speed = 109 kts (90 kts power on)

[tusler]

The Harrier will be a welcomed escort for the Huey when I am flying to perform a rescue:D

[void]

Finally my favorite Harrier. I`m so glad its not just another "conventional" jet-fighter like the Mirage or F16, IMO.

[tinkmiester]

love my razbam harrier

[Kev2go]

so these are the Uk version of the harrier?

 

how much different is the av8b 2 variant for the USMC?

[whaaw]

so these are the Uk version of the harrier?

 

how much different is the av8b 2 variant for the USMC?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Harrier_variants

[Kev2go]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Harrier_variants

 

I was only wondering about those 3 not a all those other variants, only because if there would be a usmc skin for the harrier, if they were similar enough.

 

I dont really care about all those other variants & wiki isnt really specific.

 

 

 

the uk Gr7 and gr9 are actually derived from the av8b2. which was drived from the original 1st gen harrier from the 60s.

 

gr7 looks very similar in terms of capabilities and avionics when compared to the av8b2, just using uk developed electronics.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Kev2go

[Paradox]

I'm interested in the specific differences between GR7 and GR9 in terms of avionics and weapons carriage capabilities

 

Anyone able to shed some light on that?

[emg]

^ According to http://www.airvectors.net/avav8_3.html#m5

 

This common type was the GR.9, with 60 GR.7s to be upgraded to the spec. The core of the upgrade was a MIL-STD 1760 weapons databus and a new main computer system with modernized weapons software; a new GPS-INS navigation system; a ground-proximity warning system; and improved cockpit displays. A number were also wired for the TIALD pod. The first GR.9 was redelivered in late 2006, with the upgrade program completed in 2009. GR.9s were flying in combat in Afghanistan by early 2007. The 30 GR.7s fitted with the Pegasus 107 engine and upgraded to GR.9 specification were designated "GR.9A".

 

The improved fire-control system of the GR.9 permitted use of the new Marconi "Brimstone" anti-armor missile, an advanced derivative of the US Hellfire weapon; the Brimstone featured a millimeter-wave radar seeker that provided "fire and forget" capability, and was lightweight, allowing a GR.9 to carry nine such munitions. The GR.9 could also carry the "Advanced Short-Range AAM (ASRAAM)", a British successor to the traditional Sidewinder AAM with "off-boresight" targeting capability and comparable to the AIM-9X. GR.9 pilots didn't have a helmet-mounted sight, which would have been needed to make the best use of the ASRAAM.