merlin101 Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Looking for pics of Harrier GR7/9 fitted with a TIALD pod or pylon close-ups. Anyone help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolvoWill Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 And one from the 'stan... Any good? They will start using Sniper instead of TIALD sometime this year mind you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin101 Posted April 19, 2007 Author Share Posted April 19, 2007 perfect! I'm going to do a 800 NAS one shortly, so thought it would look different with one fitted. Thanks for the pics Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 What's the deal on RN Harriers - will they actually be using them in the offensive role primarily, secondary or as one? Only ever seen photo's of RN Harriers with a fairly basic load, so just wondering if they would use the TIALD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin101 Posted April 20, 2007 Author Share Posted April 20, 2007 800 sqdn have already done a tour in Afganistan! 801 excist but have no a/c, so the two sqdns are working together currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolvoWill Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The RN units will perform the same tasks as their RAF counterparts, as Joint Force Harrier - all squadrons with the Harrier except 20 (the OCU) can be sent aboard a carrier or rotated through ground deployments such as that in Kandahar, so theres no difference in role between the notionally Navy squadrons or the RAF ones. The RAF and Navy have played silly buggers slightly with regards to 801 squadron, from a comment I read in AFM a while back. When the SHARs were retired and it was announced the FAA's squadrons were to fly RAF jets in the transition to the GR7, the Navy wanted to keep the identities of their squadrons intact, what with their Falklands heritage and all that, whilst the RAF didn't want to give away its Harriers completely to the Royal Navy, so despite all the talk of 'jointness' there was still tension between those in the RAF who saw chance to gain monopoly over fast jets, and those in the Navy who'd fight tooth and nail to keep the FAA squadrons alive, knowing full well they might get two new carriers and saw chance to gain control of a brand spanking new fleet of aircraft with it as well if there were still naval squadrons around! Anyway, with the SHAR retirement and the transition of old SHAR crews to the GR7 the RAF formed the 'Naval Strike Wing', which was to encompass 800 and 801 squadrons, and calling it that was enough to pacify the senior service as to maintaining its identity, but when it came to organisation, not enough qualified weapons instructors were posted to the 801 NAS section of the wing for it to be considered and designated a full squadron by RAF standards. So it seems that the RAF have quietly got rid of 801's identity, by absorbing it into a wing and then not giving it a full complement of staff to be considered a squadron in its own right.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The RAF and Navy have played silly buggers slightly with regards to 801 squadron, from a comment I read in AFM a while back. When the SHARs were retired and it was announced the FAA's squadrons were to fly RAF jets in the transition to the GR7, the Navy wanted to keep the identities of their squadrons intact, what with their Falklands heritage and all that, whilst the RAF didn't want to give away its Harriers completely to the Royal Navy, so despite all the talk of 'jointness' there was still tension between those in the RAF who saw chance to gain monopoly over fast jets, and those in the Navy who'd fight tooth and nail to keep the FAA squadrons alive, knowing full well they might get two new carriers and saw chance to gain control of a brand spanking new fleet of aircraft with it as well if there were still naval squadrons around! I read this too - apparently the RAF refused to allow "Royal Navy" titles to be used on the a/c. I find it really hard to accept this, as surely it could go higher and the RAF over ruled if this was the case? Makes more sense to me, that the RAF's objection would be aircraft rotation and taking care of squadron unit badges is relatively easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 And they won't let them paint 'Royal Navy' on the side of the aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 And they won't let them paint 'Royal Navy' on the side of the aircraft. Fish Head Airways would be more appropriate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolvoWill Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Fish Head Airways would be more appropriate Hehe . Are you ex-RAF yourself Gary, seems so judging by the banter? And I seem to recall mention of 33sqn and Puma's sometime back. Am interested in joining myself...got a filter interview at the AFCO in a week and a bit, ooh err Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Hehe . Are you ex-RAF yourself Gary, seems so judging by the banter? And I seem to recall mention of 33sqn and Puma's sometime back.Am interested in joining myself...got a filter interview at the AFCO in a week and a bit, ooh err Certainly am - man & boy the RAF refer to the Navy as Fish heads and the RN refered to us as Crabs (right, absolutely no PILE jokes ok). 230 squadron actually not 33, but close. Good luck with your interview - please let us know how you get on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffclark7 Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 This is my type of banter. We all know why they are called Pongo's : Where ever the Army goes the pong go's too! However, on a serious note all the services are right in it at present, expected to do more with less equipment and less manpower. The elastic can only stretch so far. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 The elastic can only stretch so far. Except the elastic seems to keep on stretching. I hear the RAF are losing more pilots now (on average) that ever before. Good old Labour :w***: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spike7451 Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 Except the elastic seems to keep on stretching. I hear the RAF are losing more pilots now (on average) that ever before. Good old Labour :w***: LIEbour.......(Corrected for spelling!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now