Harrier and Hovercraft

Discussion in 'The Quarterdeck' started by canteenflat, Dec 15, 2010.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Harrier and Hovercraft both brilliant British inventions but both commercial failures. Why?
     
  2. I think it is because the chief engineers were too busy back-scuttling your mother, instead of concentrating on the task in hand. The same can be said for Duran Duran, the Foreign Legion and AIDS researchers.
     
  3. Clearly you're a reason why Down boy!
     
  4. All just a load of hot air if you ask me. These ideas will never take off.
     
  5. The US Navy/Marines Like em
     
  6. The Ruskies are fond of them too:

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Harrier a commercial failure?

    I'm quite sure the sales to the Royal Navy, Royal Air Force, United States Marine Corps, Indian Navy, Italian Navy and Spanish Navy would qualify as a commercial success, rather than failure.

    Did the sales make a profit? Yes. Ergo, successful.
     
  8. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Ditto the Harrier-ski & Concordski

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  9. :D
     
  10. Yeah but on the plus side, look at Flymo's. Brilliant!
     
  11. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Good point, a first class piece of commercially successful kit.

    [​IMG]
     
  12. And now without doubt at air shows we will hear. Introducing "The Mcdonnel Douglas Harrier Jump Jet".

    UK F.U.B.A.R.
     
  13. I love this thread. Educational.
     
  14. It was civilian applications I was referring to.
    Hovercraft sold a few but VTOL never took off. A civlian VTOL version should be flying the world as part of the Flying Doctor Emergency Service. No airstrip provision or maintenance needed.
     
  15. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Genius.
     
  16. Never worked on Harrier, have you mate? :roll:
     
  17. [​IMG]
     
  18. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    To be fair, I'm forever having to fit new Flymo blades too, come to think of it.
     
  19. I know what he meant. :wink: I took it out of context to emphasize the point that the reason the civilian applications for STOVL technology haven't been successful is that it's too expensive, noisy, inefficient, environmentally unsound and an engineering nightmare. The same reasons why SST wasn't the commercial success it was hoped.

    Arguably, Harrier only became a commercial success when it went to sea with the USMC/RN and was sold to other nations as a fixed-wing solution for small deck carriers. Had we not scrapped our big carrier fleet in the 60s-70s the Harrier might have died at the GR1 stage of it's evolution.

    Hovercraft were very successful for a time, but now have limited applicability in those areas where it is cost efffective and a necessity. Landing Marines onto a beachhead - yes. Taking cars and passengers across the Channel - no, not when a ferry or tunnel can do it at a fraction of the cost/complexity.
     

Share This Page