US or India 'could buy Harriers'

[Abhishek_]

lol xinix, I know about Naval LCA (refer to post 4). I was only questioning Nav e l LCA. It was a poor joke I admit.

 

[sancho]

This could be a great opportunity to bolster the naval air arm. These can also operate from the new flat tops IN is going to procure.

However,these are the ground attack version unlike the harriers IN has (GR7 and GR9 without radars). it would take a lengthy refit to bring them to LUSH standard, if at all it is possible. We can try them out at A&N command!

Still a good buy if offered at low enough price; which is quite likely.

What for? IN might have not enough Harriers at the moment, but more importantly also no carrier that would be ready to deploy them! Vikrant still has problems and will be in service (if at all) only till 2015 at max and by then IN should get the first N-LCAs, let alone the 45 Migs. The only reason to go for them would be, to use them instead of N-LCA, but I doubt IN would scrap their PR project after all these development time and costs.

More interesting could be, if IAF could use them in higher mountain areas, from bases without air strips (vertical take off and landing)? Could be an interesting addition to CAS roles, especially when they are geared for ground attacks anyway. Aren't they used in Afghanistan in similar roles?

 

[kingdurgaking]

lol xinix, I know about Naval LCA (refer to post 4). I was only questioning Nav e l LCA. It was a poor joke I admit.

You know what .. i still didnt understand what you meant .. would be better if you could explain the PJ

 

[TATA]

What for? IN might have not enough Harriers at the moment, but more importantly also no carrier that would be ready to deploy them! Vikrant still has problems and will be in service (if at all) only till 2015 at max and by then IN should get the first N-LCAs, let alone the 45 Migs. The only reason to go for them would be, to use them instead of N-LCA, but I doubt IN would scrap their PR project after all these development time and costs.

More interesting could be, if IAF could use them in higher mountain areas, from bases without air strips (vertical take off and landing)? Could be an interesting addition to CAS roles, especially when they are geared for ground attacks anyway. Aren't they used in Afghanistan in similar roles?

interesting

 

[ganimi kawa]

What for? IN might have not enough Harriers at the moment, but more importantly also no carrier that would be ready to deploy them! Vikrant still has problems and will be in service (if at all) only till 2015 at max and by then IN should get the first N-LCAs, let alone the 45 Migs. The only reason to go for them would be, to use them instead of N-LCA, but I doubt IN would scrap their PR project after all these development time and costs.

More interesting could be, if IAF could use them in higher mountain areas, from bases without air strips (vertical take off and landing)? Could be an interesting addition to CAS roles, especially when they are geared for ground attacks anyway. Aren't they used in Afghanistan in similar roles?

I started to think on similar lines in the middle of my post. Especially noting that these RAF harriers are unlike LUSH version operated by IN. These planes are optimised for ground attack.

I think A&N will be a very good place to base them. No need of a runway and a tedious setup , these can be based on any of the tiny islands in the chain making it very difficult for the enemy to target them first.

For short term (upto 2020) they can do a pretty good job.

About basing them in mountains, STOL is possible, not sure about VTOL with significant payload for ground attack operations,

 

[sancho]

I started to think on similar lines in the middle of my post. Especially noting that these RAF harriers are unlike LUSH version operated by IN. These planes are optimised for ground attack.

I think A&N will be a very good place to base them. No need of a runway and a tedious setup , these can be based on any of the tiny islands in the chain making it very difficult for the enemy to target them first.

For short term (upto 2020) they can do a pretty good job.

About basing them in mountains, STOL is possible, not sure about VTOL with significant payload for ground attack operations,

IAF and IN wants full fledged air bases at A&N, so placing those Harriers there are not needed, let alone that they haven't the range of an MKI, nor the weaponary in the anti ship role from A&N don't you think?

Short take off on roads would be enough, while landing could be vertical, just like on LHDs. The point is, they could be placed in areas where normal fighters can't, because they need real air strips and as I said, especially the point of CAS, or anti tank role could be very interesting and a good support for the combat helicopters, as well as IA ground troops too.

12 x Brimstone missiles, fitted on a RAF Harrier GR7/9:

4 x Paveway IV LGBs:

 

[ganimi kawa]

IAF and IN wants full fledged air bases at A&N, so placing those Harriers there are not needed, let alone that they haven't the range of an MKI, nor the weaponary in the anti ship role from A&N don't you think?

How many bases do you think IAF and IN will have at A&N? Those few ( most likely two) bases will be the first priority targets for any task force directed against A&N.

Harriers will provide a chance to retain some of the strike capability for the A&N command while facing a massive pre emptive strike.

About the range, very few can compete with the mki. this does not make them unworthy. Here are the specs of harrier GR9.

Close Air Support range (STO, 1h loiter, 12x Mk.82) 167 km

Strike mission range (STO, Hi-Lo-Hi profile, 7x Mk.82) 1,100 km

Intercept range (Deck launch, 2x AIM-9, external fuel) 1,161 km

Combat Air Patrol radius (3h loiter) 185 km

These are quite adequte for defending A&N, don't you think?

About the anti ship weapons, two harpoon AGM 84 missiles will pack quite a punch. In fact this is the same ASh weaponary carried by naval strike jaguar IM of IAF. What do you say,bhai?

What for? IN might have not enough Harriers at the moment, but more importantly also no carrier that would be ready to deploy them! Vikrant still has problems and will be in service (if at all) only till 2015 at max.

These harriers can operate from any of the flat top amphibious ships envisaged by navy post 2015. They could lend great support to an amphibious operation.

Short take off on roads would be enough, while landing could be vertical, just like on LHDs. The point is, they could be placed in areas where normal fighters can't, because they need real air strips and as I said, especially the point of CAS, or anti tank role could be very interesting and a good support for the combat helicopters, as well as IA ground troops too.

12 x Brimstone missiles, fitted on a RAF Harrier GR7/9:

4 x Paveway IV LGBs:

STOVL could be possible (you had mentioned VTOL in the earlier post, hence the confusion). And they are indeed doing a great job performing ground attack duty in AF'stan.

 

[Dash]

More interesting could be, if IAF could use them in higher mountain areas, from bases without air strips (vertical take off and landing)? Could be an interesting addition to CAS roles, especially when they are geared for ground attacks anyway. Aren't they used in Afghanistan in similar roles?

Sancho - Buying Harriers for a ground attack roles on Northern or NE sector is not a good idea i think. coz the reason is Helos can do a better job than Harriers. Many reasons not just teh fire power but operational costs, support on those areas, specially durring war time will not be helpful.


In Afghanistan they use it for CAS but these operate out of full fledged bases(correct me if Iam wrong), where integration of weapons and support also is given.

On top of that Helos can stay behind tarrain and hide behind mountains to carry out stealthy attacks and remain airborne. The only use I see is in CAS but it comes at an unnecesary costs.

IMO buying Harriers will not be a good idea at all, coz you cant use them anywhere.

 

[sathya]

once vickramaditya gets ready harriers will bid adeau....
maximum 2 years left. buying spares should be enough
no need to keep harrier line open since already mig 29 k has arrived
n lca is in the process.
if required we can buy few naval version of mmrca to maintain the edge.
no reason to buy outdated aircraft when we have both technology and money.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

Guys no harrier for India.

Indian air chief dismisses UK’s ‘iffy’ Harriers

Britain has hit an early obstacle in its bid to sell its fleet of Harrier jump jets after India, the most promising potential buyer, described the aircraft as “iffy” and obsolete.

Air Chief Marshall PV Naik, the head of the Indian Air Force, said on Tuesday he would be looking to acquire modern aircraft of 4th generation capabilities or better. “The Harrier doesn’t fit into that category,” the Air Chief Marshall said

His dismissive remarks over the “iffy” Harrier came soon after Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton, the chief of the UK air staff, acknowledged the possibility of a sale while paying a visit to India to boost military co-operation and exports.

India is one of the largest arms bazaars in the world and is seeking to modernise its aging, largely Russian-supplied airforce, to face threats from Pakistan and China.

The distinct lack of interest shown in the Harrier, which was decommissioned in the defence review primarily on grounds of cost, will be a blow to ministers who are seeking to generate some much-needed revenue from the disposal.

Air Chief Naik’s words will particularly sting because the Ministry of Defence has spent more than £500m upgrading the Harrier avionics over the last five years and the jets could potentially remain in service until the mid 2020s.

Peter Luff, defence procurement minister, told the Financial Times this week that he was hopeful of finding a buyer for the Harrier, the pride of the Falklands war, in order to spare them from an untimely demise in a scrap yard or museum.

“There are a number of possibilities....we are looking at the options quite carefully at the moment. There are overseas markets, particularly for the Harrier,” he said.

India, along with the US, is the most likely purchaser, primarily because it bought about 30 Sea Harriers, an earlier variant, in the 1980s. Some are still used to fly off its UK-made aircraft carrier the INS Viraat, which once saw battle as HMS Hermes, the Royal Navy flagship during the Falklands conflict.

Defence collaboration was a key priority for David Cameron early this year as he led a 90-strong delegation of chief executives and cabinet ministers to India seeking to boost to trade.

An alternative is for the US to buy the Harriers to supplement its existing fleet used by the Marine Corps. Versions of the Harrier are also used by Spain and Italy.

The Harrier is one of several items of military hardware axed in the defence review that Britain is seeking to sell. Ministers seeking buyers for Nimrod spy planes, a programme cancelled shortly before the aircraft were coming into service, dozens of Typhoon fighter jets and warships including frigates and aircraft carriers.

FT.com / UK - Indian air chief dismisses UK?s ?iffy? Harriers

 

[sathya]

even the production of indian manufactured jaguar is about to end.
only engine upgrade is planned.
only reason to allow a low end aircraft to enter indian air force should be indigenious aircraft so that the industry can grow.

 

[Tshering22]

Guys no harrier for India.

Indian air chief dismisses UK’s ‘iffy’ Harriers

Britain has hit an early obstacle in its bid to sell its fleet of Harrier jump jets after India, the most promising potential buyer, described the aircraft as “iffy” and obsolete.

Air Chief Marshall PV Naik, the head of the Indian Air Force, said on Tuesday he would be looking to acquire modern aircraft of 4th generation capabilities or better. “The Harrier doesn’t fit into that category,” the Air Chief Marshall said

His dismissive remarks over the “iffy” Harrier came soon after Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton, the chief of the UK air staff, acknowledged the possibility of a sale while paying a visit to India to boost military co-operation and exports.

India is one of the largest arms bazaars in the world and is seeking to modernise its aging, largely Russian-supplied airforce, to face threats from Pakistan and China.

The distinct lack of interest shown in the Harrier, which was decommissioned in the defence review primarily on grounds of cost, will be a blow to ministers who are seeking to generate some much-needed revenue from the disposal.

Air Chief Naik’s words will particularly sting because the Ministry of Defence has spent more than £500m upgrading the Harrier avionics over the last five years and the jets could potentially remain in service until the mid 2020s.

Peter Luff, defence procurement minister, told the Financial Times this week that he was hopeful of finding a buyer for the Harrier, the pride of the Falklands war, in order to spare them from an untimely demise in a scrap yard or museum.

“There are a number of possibilities....we are looking at the options quite carefully at the moment. There are overseas markets, particularly for the Harrier,” he said.

India, along with the US, is the most likely purchaser, primarily because it bought about 30 Sea Harriers, an earlier variant, in the 1980s. Some are still used to fly off its UK-made aircraft carrier the INS Viraat, which once saw battle as HMS Hermes, the Royal Navy flagship during the Falklands conflict.

Defence collaboration was a key priority for David Cameron early this year as he led a 90-strong delegation of chief executives and cabinet ministers to India seeking to boost to trade.

An alternative is for the US to buy the Harriers to supplement its existing fleet used by the Marine Corps. Versions of the Harrier are also used by Spain and Italy.

The Harrier is one of several items of military hardware axed in the defence review that Britain is seeking to sell. Ministers seeking buyers for Nimrod spy planes, a programme cancelled shortly before the aircraft were coming into service, dozens of Typhoon fighter jets and warships including frigates and aircraft carriers.

FT.com / UK - Indian air chief dismisses UK?s ?iffy? Harriers

Ouch! There goes the dream to make a few bucks out of a dying goat....

I like the smack attitude of our new Joint Chief (also IAF chief). You've got to admit it guys... the man has style...

 

[satishkumarcsc]

IAF was never intrested in Harriers...its the Navy that must be asked. If the Indian Naval cheif says it then I will go by his claims. But according to me we need those harriers. Even stripped down versions on Viraat will do.

 

[sancho]

How many bases do you think IAF and IN will have at A&N? Those few ( most likely two) bases will be the first priority targets for any task force directed against A&N.

1 or 2, with at least 1 squad of MKIs. They are clearly more capable in air defense, anti ship, and strike roles than the Harriers. That means we can use A&N as a strategic location to cover the whole Bay of Bengal area, even into the the Straight of Malakka, Harriers simply can't do this job.

Harriers will provide a chance to retain some of the strike capability for the A&N command while facing a massive pre emptive strike.
These are quite adequte for defending A&N, don't you think?

I think that is the difference between our points, you see the Harriers as needed to defend A&N, I see A&N only as a base to project our power further in the above mentioned regions (like a fixed carrier) and first line of defense against naval attacks from the east.

About the anti ship weapons, two harpoon AGM 84 missiles will pack quite a punch. In fact this is the same ASh weaponary carried by naval strike jaguar IM of IAF. What do you say,bhai?

That's the max and only with 1 centerline tank I guess and I'm not saying it is not good, but still only at the lower end of capabilities. Compare that with MKIs, 1 x Brahmos, 3 x Kh 59, or 4 x Kh 35 anti ship missiles (a combo of them are possible too) and all these can be delivered at very long ranges.

These harriers can operate from any of the flat top amphibious ships envisaged by navy post 2015. They could lend great support to an amphibious operation.

True, but honestly do you really think we will ever attack any of our possible enemies with an amphibious attack?

 

[sancho]

Sancho - Buying Harriers for a ground attack roles on Northern or NE sector is not a good idea i think. coz the reason is Helos can do a better job than Harriers. Many reasons not just teh fire power but operational costs, support on those areas, specially durring war time will not be helpful.

Don't forget the lesson we learned from Kargil, where our combat helicopters were not able to fly in such high altitude conditions and could not provide good support to the ground troops.
I only say, if they are cheap and available from next year on, they could be a good gap filler for shrinking IAF squad numbers, till LCA, MMRCA... are fully inducted and gives even special advantages that these couldn't.

In Afghanistan they use it for CAS but these operate out of full fledged bases(correct me if Iam wrong), where integration of weapons and support also is given.

Sure, because the allied troops have total air superiority there. The point is Harriers don't need a real air base necessarily, they can land on a normal road, can be re-armed by a small support troop and take off again.

However, like the article confirms IAF don't want them.