Harrier Taking Off

Harrier Taking off while onboard the USS WASP

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Harrier
• Jet
• Jets
• Navy
• Underway
• Ships
• USS
• WAS
• Middle
• East

[adam13deaf]

marines cant go anywhere without navys holding their hands lol

[wraprop]

@adam13deaf This isn't true. As a matter of fact, Marines had changed their mission focus from Amphibious based to more land based when they started focusing on the ground mission in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although they are still being part of ARG's and travelling on amphibs, they are also going to the Middle East on regular aircraft transports.

That being said, the Marine Corps is going to start moving back their amphibious route. They don't want to be seen as another Army.

[raythedodger]

Here is a question; do these carriers need a special runway considering the heat generated by the engines is pointed downward? If not, can this bad boy land on a Nimitz class?

[wraprop]

@raythedodger They take off using that small LHD runway but need to land vertically...at least onboard the LHD's. Obviously when they are on land, they can land on a runway. I think (although I'm not sure) they could land on a carrier but would need to do a vertical landing as I don't think they are set up to do an arrested landing.

[KCfunny]

i thought it hovered??? whats up with the launch?

[wraprop]

@KCfunny They can take off vertically, but that uses alot of fuel. They can also take off the way you see. They can only land vertically though.

[antimorons1945]

@josephkennith the harriers are no longer in service anyway. they will replace them with the f 35's in 2013

[tikkihut58]

@KCfunny - Take a look at an Osprey (MV-22). The blades are huge and the blade loading is so great they have issues with downwash, vortex rings states, etc.

[tikkihut58]

@KCfunny - It would be great to be able to takeoff vertically, but even the new JSF doesn’t make near the power to do it fully loaded. That is a tremendous around of energy required. Even if you could make an engine that powerful, it would be difficult to create a surface that could withstand it. The horizontal takeoff distributes the vertical lift requirement between the wings and the engine. In a vertical takeoff, the engine obviously has to do all the vertical lifting.

[tikkihut58]

@KCfunny - Onboard ships, Harriers takeoff horizontally and land vertically. Reason for not taking off vertically is that you cannot launch with much weight. You can carry more into the air with a horizontal launch. For landing, every landing must be vertical on the ship. If you need to do a roll-on landing, you need to find a runway ashore and divert. The boat is not designed for it.

[tikkihut58]

@KCfunny - Harriers launch off ships using their own power. No catapult assist. When taking off on a boat, once a Harrier engine reaches full power you are committed to taking off. There is no abort ability other than ejection. Same for the catapult shots for the big decks once the stroke starts for all those guys.

[SkullKing11841]

@raythedodger No they dont there decks can take the harrier's thrust heat. But the F-35B engine that points down for vertical take off, generates enough heat to melt the deck of any known aircraft carrier flight deck (and they found that out not to long ago, it wont melt through straight away but will make it warp and weaken it) so for that there going to have to say put down a more heat resistant metal for were it has to vertically land, normal take off is not a problem. :)

[sonolowblow]

@wraprop They can land conventionally, it's just that they're not fitted with the mechanism that allows conventional landing on an aircraft carrier, which is part of the reason behind their development.