HMS Ark Royal - Last Ever Harrier (GR9) Launches, November 2010 

D130596V Hi mate, thank you, I appreciate your comment and I totally agree. I was D218365C, so not too long behind you, shipmate! Thanks for looking, take care, mihearty!

@G0INWAYBACK WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This sounds like too much common sense to me.

Agree

I wonder how our government could find £205 Billion for Trident but couldn’t find £900 Million to renovate the Harrier fleet. We have recently launched 2 new aircraft carriers: what aircraft are they flying off them as I don’t believe the replacements for them (the American F-35B) are actually ready and onboard yet. By the way, the F35B is inferior in range and g-stress to the F-35A and by far to the Eurofighter. Maybe we should have revamped the Harriers for a few years yet? Before the Falklands conflict, serious doubts were cast on the Harrier’s ability to fight supersonic aircraft such as the Mirage etc, it being subsonic. They were definitely proved wrong their. Maybe this is why the US Marines still fly them and have bought up some of our old airframes. The US Marines have always been more independent-minded then a their bird or grunt colleagues ...

MPOLSLAV it was a horrible plane!,! Lots of marine pilots lost their lives flying it.. 300-400 planes lost if not more.. . just google total harrier losses. my father flew in A6E intruders at MCAS cherry point.he was a bombardier navigator ... his squadron was VMAT(AW)-202.. his squadron was next to the first harrier squadron in the Marine Corps.. our family lost friends flying it.. it’s a widow maker.. big gimmick that killed lots of marines.. for little gain in capability...

@@stevensrspcplusmc if your losing that many planes then you need to train your pilots better.

@@kennethjones4578 It was all agreed that's what would happen. Then Jock Stirrup, who not long after retired on one of the the highest public sector pensions ever recorded, went behind everyones backs including his own light blue Harrier jocks, and hoodwinked baby prime minister cameron into a terrible decision costing the nation hundreds on millions and a decade of lost capability.

+Hilde Venegas Yeah but the F-35's are fucking awesome.

RobloxPlayer how old are you?

Hilde Venegas It's an old account, ignore the name.

+RobloxPlayer The F-35 is absolutely terrible.

MaroonBugUK I've come to realize this.

I totally agree. We (my Navy colleagues and I) were all gob-smacked at the government's half-baked and ludicrous decision to scrap these great British gems, as were 99% of the public we've spoken to since. It was an absolute slap in the face to such an innovative, iconic and brilliant feat of engineering (the Harrier) and such disrespect for our great nation's heritage, in flippantly scrapping our historic Flagship (Ark Royal). Thank you for your comment!

professorclown Wish I didn't had to make such comments, like you say, ludicrous decision from those whose suppose to be running the country, its such a shame, there will never be another Harrier and a few years yet before they produce the next aircraft carrier!

Well said! The lightnings we are replacing it with may be a more capable aircraft but they have nothing when in comes to the beauty of this marvelous machine.

They waste money everywhere but when it comes to keep old aircrafts on the air obviously not all they think about budgets like last Vulcan harrier concord many more

That they want to make an uglier carrier?!

The F-35's won't be in British service until about 2020 at the earliest! Current aircraft and carriers shouldn't be retired until the new stock is in service. The RN currently has no offensive/defensive aircraft and is only really a maritime patrol service at present!

ianrkav You're absolutely right. We are now a disgrace. We have NO 'Strike Capability', therefore, in the eyes of the world, the UK is now an easy target. The RN is (at present) a shadow of its former self. This is all because of self-serving, incompetent, politically correct (weak) government.

Well, apart frrom Nuclear submarines and Tornado GR4, and to a lesser extent Typhoon. The surface fleet has no strike capability as of yet. I don't think they carry Tomahawk or similar!

ianrkav I think the British government know alot more than you on how to protect are nation, people are just upset to see a plane go now this country could defend and attack with in minutes of notice.

Do you mean 'a lot,' 'our' and 'within'? I would say the military know a lot more than the government on how to protect our nation, and the military protested the loss of the Sea Harriers and GR7's/9's and carriers, by showing that it would leave a significant gap in our defensive/offensive capabilities until the arrival of the super carriers and F-35! At present our only fixed wing capability lies with Typhoon FGR4, whilst brilliant in its air defence role has limited offensive capability,and the ageing Tornado GR4. About half these aircraft are currently grounded due to lack of spares! I accept this nation could put up a limited air,sea and land defence within minutes of notice against our own shores but any sustained large scale attack would take much longer to mobilise against and I think we would find ourselves wanting. Our military is in a sorry state!

I think it was the same for many of us. Amazing, versatile aircraft, with a unique role (STOVL/VSTOL). Great planes to see in action, but also at air displays (with a decent, brave pilot!). :0)

Whats the other legend you are talking about?

Prranshu Yadav Ark Royal

xfire7 lol

Must be even more pissed off now, everything in this video was decommissioned, staff included most likely XD

Aaron Cunningham l

eins zwei Vielen Dank , ich schätze Ihre Kommentare, und ich stimme zu , war der Harrier eine so vielseitige und in der Lage Flugzeuge mit seinen Blau Vixen Radar und Raketen AAMRAM suite. Es wird fast ireplaceable sein . Ich hoffe, dass mein Deutsch ist nicht so schlecht !

mee too from Honduras C.A

RaySpainPlayer It’s actually an AEW version, note the radome below the fuselage. That said, you’re right, this is fantastic footage of consummate professionals. Sadly missed.

Absolutely. The new carriers seem to be a lot better designed e.g. aircraft lifts at the side, rather than in the middle of the runway (when they broke, they knocked out fixed wing/strike capability)........ They look a lot more 'roomy' inside, too, judging by the latest documentary series on them. 👍

you dont need even close to perfect eyesight to qualify for the air force, look up your local requirements, you might still be able to

@@sebastiaomendonca1477 Hey man, yeah thanks for that. Bit late for me now.The country would be in trouble if they needed me at this age! I wanted to specifically fly planes off of ships(and hopefully back again). If I had suceeded however, it wouldn't have been for long. For the first time in 100 years, the RN didn't fly planes off ships for a number of years right in the middle of what would have been my "career", so don't feel too bad for me!

it would be better if they were supersonics...there was aprogram for the Supersonic Harrier,for politic could not be possible, there for was a good aircraft.

@@guillermoalvaradoflores8698 the Engineers made a Supersonic engine for them which was the P.1154 but was funded by the government! They chose the Subsonic P.1127 which still made the Harrier perform superbly during dogfighting & the P.1154 design was used for today’s F35B

lol wut, how is the harrier the most deadly jet in history? if you had said the mirage 3 or hawker hunter you might have had an argument but the harrier is no where close to the most deadly in history

If by "deadly" you mean crashed 3X more than any other aircraft, then yes you are correct.

Damage, Inc. *insert joke about the F-104 killing most of the German airforce and being called the widow maker here*

@@TOMVUTHEPIMP it was the pilots not the plane

Catapult system is more expensive?

EMALS didn't work in 2010, didn't have a priuce tag and the builders couldn't give guarantees. So they stayed STOVL as intended. In 2020 the only EMALS ship is the USS Gerald R Ford. And that cosy $18 Bn and its EMALS still doesn't work ..

Dylan Milne they always bowed for the crowd - an amazing sight

Kieron, in all honesty, I don't really think the AEOs knew what they were doing - especially 'on deck'. That particular AEO was a young lieutenant, who was genuinely a decent guy, but they just don't have the engineering experience, knowledge or prowess to do their job to a fully competent level. It takes years to understand these aircraft systems.

I can vouch for that, whilst hovering it is so loud it shakes your internal organs ( very similar to loud sub woofers in a car) I was only 30 feet away and I think the pilot was showing off to his family by hovering a bit too close to the Arks flight deck (Portsmouth Open day)

Hell. We could've at least kept a dozen. Italy and Spain have managed that, and their economies are in an even worse state than ours. Why did we have to get rid of *all* our Harriers? It makes no sense.

You're right, but I personally think we should have kept all of them. The Harrier was/is such a versatile aircraft and the Royal Navy now has NO strike capability for its carriers, sorry - solitary carrier. Cynical? Me? Absolutely!

professorclown Haha, yep, that would be much better. I think the fact that Thatcher was the only British Prime Minister since Churchill who didn't make cuts to the military somewhat excuses us of our cynicism. On the bright side we do have some strike capability in the form of Apaches. I think Libya was the first time Apaches have been flown from ships in a combat situation. Our new Destroyers also have a much greater anti-air capability than the Harriers ever did. Although saying that, we still should've kept some.

George Thatcher wanted to make cuts to the Military If the Falklands hadn't happened. Most noteably the sale of Invincible to Australia

Harrier II is a McDonnell Douglas design not British.

Couldn’t agree more!

concur, new carriers but no new harriers, one without the other doesn't make sense, twas the perfect carrier aircraft, go anywhere, land anywhere. falklands proved that, dumb, not progress.

Yes, you're absolutely right, but maybe it was just a case of 'good luck' that we didn't need a task group throwing together, at the last minute - we would have been up a well-known creek, with a leek! Thanks for your comment.

Yeah could well be luck I agree, I would like to think that when making the decision that it was based on some intelligence about the likely threat and requirement for a carrier in the timelines between the new ones coming on stream.

Totally agree, but I would have gone a tad further and said "thanks for the kick in the bollocks, Dave!"….

It is a genuine travesty, as the Harrier was an ingenious, radically iconic and, more to the point, a brilliant example of british engineering at its best. Yes, it is lamentable that these fantastic warbirds had their lives and legacy cut so drastically short. Amen….

I was under the impression HMS Ark Royal was going to be named HMAS Sydney if she had entered service in the RAN.

Yes, this was (sadly) the last ever launch (four Harrier GR 7s) before we made way to Hamburg, for the last ever ship's 'run ashore'. The Ark definitely had CIWS (Phalanx) fitted, I remember them from my time onboard. Not sure about the SK paint scheme, as I was only on Harriers (800 Sqn), but sadly, the Sea Kings were soon to be scrapped also, and replaced by the Merlins.

@@professorclown: Maybe I was thinking of Sea Dart...Merlin is a good piece of gear though. What I remember most about British Harriers, is when I was sitting on the Nimitz in 1982 and watching them wipe the floor with Argentinas Air Force.

@@alansparks2317 Possibly Sea Dart/Sea Wolf(?), although I'm not a ships' weapons expert. I think they had to 'fight well' down in the Falklands, as they were only few in number, and that 'Task Group' was a long way from home. It was also a justifiable war for Britain, as we were fighting for a piece of our sovereign territory - though the 'Argies' would dispute that, even now. The US, and other navies, still operate the AV8B version, which is still a highly capable and versatile aircraft.

@@professorclown : Indeed

Absolutely! Genuinely such a real tragedy that they decommissioned the Harrier and the Ark Royal - WAY too early, on both counts. The Harrier is still in service with some nations, so it is still a very worthy aircraft.

exactly. build a Supersonic Harrier, i said befor: F35 is very expensive.