tornado v harrier

  sunnystaines 08:28 11 Nov 2010

click here

the link gives a view that keeping the harrier and scrap the tornado is better.

not being RAF whats your view, any ex military give an opinion.

  Quickbeam 08:34 11 Nov 2010

The Harrier gives a much more spectacular airshow performance.

Is that of any help for making the choice?

  interzone55 08:50 11 Nov 2010

I like Tornados, and I like Harriers, but which is better

only one way to find out


(apologies to Harry Hill for nicking one of his many catchphrases)

  morddwyd 08:52 11 Nov 2010

The Harrier is much more versatile, and is particularly suited for close support of ground forces as in Afghanistan, where opposing forces are often only yards apart.

If it's not sure where the enemy is it can stop and have a look.

The Tornado can't.

It can also land on carriers, if there are any available.

I was indirectly involved with the Tornado development when it was still MRCA, Multi Role Combat Aircraft.

Therein lies its problem. It is multi-role and multi-national and is therefore a compromise on all fronts.

It does lots of jobs for lots of people, but isn't the best at any of them, or the preferred choice for any of them.

If you want to build a good, quality, long lasting wall you hire a bricklayer, not a jobbing builder.

(Just noticed I've repeated what was said in the link. Please believe me when I say I have only just read it. It's just that the points are so obvious)

  johndrew 09:45 11 Nov 2010

There are few aircraft that are good at more than one role; they should be dedicated.

The Harrier as a STOL aircraft is perfect for operation in 'of airfield' conditions and for close air support (as morddwyd says). However it is also excellent in air combat as, with its VIFFing ability it can out manoeuvre many other types - especially those that are designed for speed. It is also quite a small aircraft which makes it a smaller target and easier for transportation by sea.

The Tornado is a standard fixed wing ground attack/interceptor (depending on variant) which is relatively large, carries a large payload, needs a dedicated airfield and is quite quick.

My choice to retain would be Harrier - even though it is expensive to maintain and needs quite a lot of dedicated support equipment.

  morddwyd 10:00 11 Nov 2010

"needs quite a lot of dedicated support equipment."

And dedicated groundcrew.

Harrier operations in the field are one of the few occasions when RAF groundcrew operate under field conditions.

We normally used to live in reasonable accommodation, and sent the officers out to do the fighting!

  birdface 10:36 11 Nov 2010

If you keep the Harrier then you would also keep the Ark Royal.

  Woolwell 10:44 11 Nov 2010

Firstly I need to declare a bias as I'm ex Fleet Air Arm and have worked with but not flown Sea Harriers. To me there was only one choice between the Tornado and the Harrier and that was we should retain the Harrier.

I don't know that much about the Tornado but I suspects that it's range and payload is better than a Harrier and having a navigator means that one can concentrate on flying whilst the other gets the weapons away.

However the Harrier is the only fixed wing aircraft currently able to fly from our carriers. We are currently talking about a 10 year gap before fixed wing flying begins again from sea. In that time most of the expertise will have gone, the trained aircrew and support staff lost/made redundant. Getting that back will take time and money with RAF staff having to do a lot of the work. Therefore the Harrier should have been retained.

  Woolwell 10:53 11 Nov 2010

Not necessarily so providing that Illustrious is kept running in good condition until the new carriers arrive.

  al's left peg 11:36 11 Nov 2010

They will not scrap the Tornado because it's built by a consortium of European nations. The Uk would in most probability be penalised by our European friends if we were to scrap this joint project, or remove it from our armoury.

The Harrier is a great aircraft and is probably most suited to the theaters that our forces operate in at the present time. I believe it is short sighted of the government to scrap this aircraft, along with the Ark Royal until we have suffiicent cover till the new carrier comes along.

The Falklands will probably be at risk within a very short time of the harriers going to the breakers yard. It will also mean all those forces personel who lost their lives or were injured during that campaign suffered for nothing which is a disgrace in my opinion

  ronalddonald 11:39 11 Nov 2010

A harrier can Hover a Tornado cant, when my dad use to make parts at British Aerospace Kingston Upon Thames many many years ago...............

Alas the Government sells of what is good for Britain and Britain loses big time typical of a tory government

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

The Evil Within 2 review-in-progress

Adobe shows still-in-development tools, including automatically colourising black-and-white photos

iPhone X news: Release date, price, new features & specs

Comment transformer un iPhone en borne Wi-Fi ?