Can a Harrier Jump Jet come to a near halt in mid air by switching to VTOL mode in flight, to do the Top Gun tier shenanigans?
>>30041031
yup, it's called vectoring in forward flight (VIFF) and the brits used it against the argies successfully
Yep, they pulled that shit during the Falklands to beat to the superior fighters that the Argentine Air Force had.
>>30041046
>they pulled that shit during the Falklands to beat to the superior fighters that the Argentine Air Force had.
>Argentina
>Superior fighters
Sarcasm?
>>30041612
I'm guessing superior to the Harrier. Honestly I don't think much is needed of a FIGHTER jet to be considered superior to a subsonic STRIKE jet.
>>30041612
Nice meme, but Argentina had a very well equipped and trained air force at the time.
>>30041649
Why did they lose then?
>>30041690
The air superiority battle or the war itself?
>>30041690
Because they couldn't operate any of their aircraft from the islands themselves (apart from some COIN planes).
They had a sizeable force of Daggers, Skyhawks, and Mirage IIIs, but they were forced to fly them from the mainland after the Black Buck raids disabled the runway at Stanley. They did have an aircraft carrier, but that got withdrawn from the area after the Belgrano was sunk.
That meant every single raid they sent out required aerial refueling of the strike aircraft just to extend the combat radius far enough that the aircraft could reach the islands. The Mirage IIIs didn't have a refueling probe, meaning they could only fly out, make a single pass, and leave.
>>30041735
>That meant every single raid they sent out required aerial refueling of the strike aircraft just to extend the combat radius far enough that the aircraft could reach the islands.
Well jeez that settles it right there. They could have been running F-15's and still lost under those conditions.
>>30041046
Skyhawks are honestly probably comparable to a Harrier. a Mirage III is better, but the Skyhawks were where the Argentinians sent their best pilots.
>>30041036
Harriers have never VIFFed in combat in UK use.
They never had cause to.
>>30041031
Yes why not.
>>30041793
Skyhawks were used as bomb trucks, they were dead meat if a Harrier got near one.
Harrier can do a lot of silly stuff.
Pic: Lost and out of gas over water this guy improvised an aircraft carrier from a passing freighter. He actually parked it on a container but it shifted a bit..
yes.
it can also be used to fly backwards, for a few seconds.
>>30041612
>Superior fighters
>Sarcasm?
on paper, the Argentine Mirages should have utterly slaughtered the subsonic Harrier. The latest generation of Sidewinder missiles helped, but it was still outclassed in terms of speed and overall power.
the harrier pilots used a combination of the plane's low-altitude agility, to keep down in the shoreline hills, and force the mirages to descend to their altitude, rather than trying to engage them higher where they would've had the advantage, and the bombing of the runway at Port Stanley forced the argentines to fly from the mainland, and therefore had minimal fuel reserves for engagements over the falklands, which again worked to the Harrier's advantage.
without those differences, the harriers wouldnt have even been in the same league.
>>30042012
Some say Black Buck was pointless. ;)
>>30041036
>yup, it's called vectoring in forward flight (VIFF) and the brits used it against the argies successfully
>Deliberately lose energy and become an easier target
Yeah, nah, you're a cunt.
>>30042037
This took care of the Argentinian surface fleet btw.
>>30042001
>hi um, I've been involved in an accident and I'd like to claim on my insurance
>Could you please describe the accident?
>uh, yeah a jet crashed into it
>......
>>30041960
>implying the Harrier's not a bomb/rocket truck
>>30042037
Physically it was.
The damage from the bombs was repair the very next day, however it scared the shit out of the Argentines and convinced them not to place aircraft on the runway.
>>30042053
the three axioms of BFM are:
1. maneuver in relationship to the bandit
2. lose sight, lose fight
3. trade energy for nose position wisely
it's not a bad thing to cash in your energy. it's a bad thing to do so without a sound reason and a plan of exploiting the advantage gained by doing so.
>>30041690
mediocroe but brave pilots flying on low fuel with no radar coverage and inferior missiles.
>>30042053
>no fighter has deliberately gone into a stall in the history of air combat
Look at this fucking faggot and laugh.
>>30041031
THRUST VECTORING OWNS THE SKY etc etc
>>30041690
If a few more of their bombs had been fuzed correctly they might not have
the Falklands was a lot fucking closer than people realize, Britain wasn't curbstomping a colonial shithole, they were fighting on near parity beyond the extreme end of their own expeditionary capability.
>>30042150
The ships hit with unexploded bombs could all of been lost and the UK would still win.
Argentina never managed an attempt at the carriers.
The UK decided not to make use of it's SSN's to destroy Argentine ships in Argentine waters, despite having the submarines in place and targets in sight.
There are just far too many "well maybe if this happened" between the argies and winning.
>>30042094
Harriers come in more than one flavour and this was one of the worlds best all weather fighters at the time.
>>30042150
They even had to beg the Frenchs to stop selling exocets for a while.
Beg . The . Frenchs
As a Frenchman I find this hilarious, quite a pity really tho, could've skyrocketed exocets sales if we had'nt listen to the iron cunt
>>30042272
France was told to stop. Not sure what the stick used was but it must have stung.
>>30042341
> Told to
More likely they saw their interest in having one of their closest allies back.
Mitterand would'nt have take any shit from the bitch, he was actually the one with the pointy stick, and decided not to use it.
>>30042229
I dunno about that, iirc's the ships hit by the misfuzed bombs included Britain's main transports
the Argie bombers already cost them all but 1 of their Chinooks, which is why they had to walk across the islands, losing more irreplaceable equipment at an early stage could have deterred the task force from continuing the operation.
Especially if the ARA had continued threatening the CTF rather than withdrawing completely after Belgrano (of course, that exposes them to the equally real threat of being rekt by SSNs)
>tfw 25th of May vs Invincible would have been the first post-ww2 carrier on carrier action if the argies hadn't blinked
>>30042361
>>30042341
*supposedly* Thatcher implied to Mitterand that the exocet posed such a threat to the British task force that her government would be forced to deploy nuclear weapons against Argentina
I doubt she actually made that threat, but its possible
>>30042432
When they sailed out the fleet was still fitted to take on "The Bear" and a lot of effort was taken while under way to remove the weapons to safe storage.
If a carrier had been hit then using them would have been probably the best ecological way to remove them from the fleet.
I'm sure that N word was used.
>>30042459
Nuke equipped Harrier.
>>30042412
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_naval_forces_in_the_Falklands_War
The british had a lot of transports, ceased most of it from trade.
>>30042459
They should have started painting the Vulcans white and let the press see it. There were nuclear depth charges on board some of the ships but they were taken off at Ascension.
>>30042432
>>30042459
What would've been the point of nukes?
Tactically glass any cluster of Argie ships? Couldn't the subs do this well enough?
>>30042499
Take out their airfields in Argentina
>>30042499
When their fleet fled back to port turning it into an enormous fireball would have made a cheap and cheerful demonstration of who they were messing with.
I think people would have been rather upset with us if we had.
The
>>30042570
imagine how much more butthurt Kirchner would be if Belgrano had been sunk by a nuclear torpedo
>>30042570
We should have demonstrated the more powerful Sea Eagle and taken the sales of anti ship missiles off the Exocet. People were quick to opt for Sea Skua instead of the french as12 when our helicopters started fucking things up with it,
>>30042658
Did the FAA at the Falklands have the Sea Eagle? I don't think it had entered service yet
>>30042773
no one had sea eagle in 1982.
>>30041036
No it was never used in combat
maybe it could have been used against a mig-25 that got in too close
Yeah it has
>>30042881
Harrier vs Mig 25 in a turning fight ?
That's pretty messed up because it presupposes that not only are all a-a missiles expended but that the Mig really wanted to stick around to play.
Iraq buried theirs.
>>30042543
Operation Mikado.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mikado
>>30043322
>citation required
>>30044089
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mikado
>The mission required that the Sea King helicopter travel a distance close to its operation range, so this would be a one-way mission. Therefore, the aircrew mission consisted of dropping the SAS team in Argentina, heading to Chile and disposing of the aircraft by sinking it in deep water.
that's not even close to the ballsiest bit
why does no one else do stuff as mad as the Brits ?
>>30042012
i remember the argentinians using militarised passenger jets they flew at a couple meters above the ocean to fuck with radar target spotting of the British ships to great effect.
Basically they would sneak up and fly up real fucking close to the ships and distract them, making harriers scramble and then they would attack the distracted harriers from the side or back with the real fighting force.
also surface to air missiles... tons of them
>>30042053
>>30044393
>>30044405
>>30044393
Argentinian Mig 23s.
>>30044212
the mission was fubar from the getgo though... just read the article, typical thatcher fuckery
>>30044212
You should read some of the stories on ARRSE
Full of utter madness
>>30044449
MiG-23s are almost always the reds that get bullied in these ACM diagrams from the 80's.
>>30044449
It's interesting to see the percieved threat.
This thread is so full of drift that I'm going to post her.
Goodnight.
>>30044212
Coulda done it easily with gliders
But the west decided to forget they ever existed after WW2
Same thing with the US, just not doing desirable missions because their shitty helicopters don't have the capability
>>30044630
>gliderfag reporting for duty
This guy again; jeez: here we go....
>>30044185
Way to go missing the joke
>>30044514
Because not many fulcrums or flankers were in service yet. For most of the cold war the MiG-23 was THE best fighter the reds had
