Pepsi: Um ,what jet? Man who got points: U know the one that in the commercial with a bijilion points that I have. Pepsi: oh that’s just for advertising. Man who got points: U Soda scammers, I’m gonna end your business. Pepsi: Ok then. Call for harrier Hear your jet that you will see in hell.
Where has all the CAS gone And where are all the jets? Where's the QRF To fight the rising odds? Isn't there a juiced up pilot upon a flying steed Late in the fight, I toss and I turn And I dream of what I need I need a Harrier I'm holding out for a Harrier 'til the end of the fight He's gotta be armed, and he's gotta be fast And he's gotta be fresh from the FARP I need a Harrier
POV: It's 1982, and you're a British infantryman pinned down on a certain island off South America and you hear the sound of a Rolls Royce Pegasus in the sky
While the Marines will retire theirs soon, the Harrier has proven itself in combat many times, while exotic, fancy planes like the F-22 mostly just fly air shows.
In the Falklands, the Argentinians referred the Harrier as the "silent death". Due to its ability to pop up out of nowhere, turn on a sixpence and go to guns on them. Many of argentine jets,ships and tanks were destroyed by sneak attacks made by harriers.
Ironically the Vulcan was similar in her effect on the Argies (despite having four Olympus turbojets & being known for her Howl), because in her strikes on the islands they didn't hear her until she'd passed overhead & everything was exploding 😂 . Galtieri's cabinet immediately realized that if the UK wanted to, it could stike targets in Argentina itself, and they could do very little to stop them 🤔
The fancy planes like the F-22 and F-35 get all of the glory, but never see any actual dogfights, while the lowly Harriers (all models) has served with distinction is several wars and has a 42 combat kills with no losses to other aircraft. It was praised as one of the key weapons in the gulf wars, and continues to serve with distinction, having recently shot down six Houthi drones. You can call me partial because I was in VMA-513, but I was also in VMFA-451 (F4J) and the plane I more commonly associate with he the Harrier.
@@twotailedavenger Weeeelll I would say more MoD centrally than the Navy. If anythimg I reckon the Navy wouldve happily kept the SHARs rather than having the Fleet Air Arm fighter complement cut down to one squadron of Lightnings.
They're getting the next generation of Rolls Royce vertical lift tech in the form of the F-35B. So at least there's still a bit of Bri'sh engineering in it ;).
all i’m gonna say this Specific Aircraft The AV-8B *REDACTED* i have sat in the cockpit of one at my local airport they were VMFA-223 ze Bulldogs A Major let me sit in the harrier and was pretty hot heh 😅 but anyways that’s plane is a Beauty and its sad i won’t be able to sit in one again even though i have hold a dream close to fly one but the magnifice of this plane i will miss a true warrior bird
Hey, at least the comments given too your posting credit the original posting of this video when you uploaded or copied it from raptorav1 (AJ Perez) and reposted it. Bet you don't have the original Mini-CD originally distributed by McDonald Douglas Tech Reps to Marine Corps AV8B Harrier Maintainers. 😛
@@User-dc6smLast I checked, the Brits haven't declared war since 1942 against Thailand, who was an ally of the Imperial Japanese. Now check back with the US and see how many they've declared.
^ Irrelevant, as the only Harrier loss by the FAA to enemy action was to [unguided] ground fire. If every missile launched in history had hit its target, then every aircraft in history would have been shot down several times over 😆 .
@@jimtaylor294 You're absolutely foolish to infer from my reply that I would have implied every missile fired would have hit it's target, let alone been able to neutralise in one blow. What I did to is refute your nonchalant claim that IRCM would completely remove to threat of SAMs for a Harrier or any other jet aircraft for that reason.
Completely failed in its fleet defence role in the Falklands because it was far, far too slow. If they'd stuck with the Phantom and at least one proper aircraft carrier they wouldn't have haemorrhaged the ships that they lost to fast jet attacks from close and at long range. Decent at the ground role and that's all she wrote.
@@xvo7271 "Completely failed in its fleet defence role". The fact that Argentinian aircraft could even get close to the shipping meant that it failed to do its job. A real fighter could have intercepted the Argentine fighter bombers before they got anywhere near the island and/or the fleet ships. The Harrier was so slow it couldn't do that. They had to wait for the Argentinians to come down from altitude and slow down to do bomb runs on the ships and the islands so they could engage. Additionally the Yanks gave the British the new sidewinder missile (AIM-9L) on the way down to the Falklands. This sidewinder was a game changer and would have given ANY aircraft an edge in such close low-speed air-to-air combat situations. So it wasn't the plane or the pilots, it was the missile.
@@ciaranoconnor1949 literally 2 of our pilots managed to get behind 4 argentine pilots and destroyed 3. our pilots where without a doubt better, plus if i remember correctly some of our ships werent even fitted with missiles to defend itself
@@xvo7271 21 of the 23 aircraft shot down, were shot down with an AIM Nine Lima. They were so important that the Americans shipped them to Ascension island to be picked up on the way down. The nickname of the sidewinder AIM-9L was "the death ray". It was the most advanced short range air to air missile of its time and the first heat seeker that could be fired from any orientation, including head-on. So again, not the pilots, not the plane, the missile.
@@ciaranoconnor1949 it is also the pilot? because a missile doesnt matter if the enemy is behind u because u cant lock onto an aircraft behind you. so yea it is also the pilot, our pilots were alot better than the Argentine pilots
