Sea Harrier losses

Hi RonOO-RN Sea Harrier losses 1980-1996 were 28 with 3 lost to ground defences in conflict,considering the low roster numbers this a costly exercise to maintain ,I just hope the F 35 at its cost of ?? maybe AUD$100 mill does not loose these numbers. Fortunately only 8 aircrew were lost. The RAF 1969-1996 lost 78 Harriers & the USMC 1971-1996 lost 103. I do not have any figures for the last 10 years. Having said that I understand that the Harrier is the first of the STOL breed & problems are to be expected, also the Harrier has been a proven sucess in combat. However at the cost of new F 35 losses like this would be unsustainable for all but the wealthiest few nations.For the UK the loss of aircraft was probnably of lesser importance as it got all the spinoffs as the manufacturer regardless of cost,which is fair enough.

Santi-Great comparison chart & pics. There is no doubt that there will be quite a few 15000-25000t flat decked ships capapable of operating the F 35B coming on line in the near future .If they opt to operate the F35B they had better have plenty of money ,for setting up this operation would be very expensive indeed.Not only is the airgroup and its support expensive but if the F35B is anything like the Sea Harrier the cost of replacing the incredible number of planes lost to accidents etc. will be prohibitive.

This ship looks absolutely hideous,it will never feature on any “Favorite Warship” thread.

The reason I originally asked if the Trackers had been re-engined successfully was because I thought I had read [somewhere some time ago ]that it had not worked with any real success. Anyhow we can still use them with original engines on our upgraded HMAS Melbourne with success I think

I just love the look of the Maraseti, I just hope the fire control systems can make good use of all that mean looking gear. It is a bit powerful to just be tooling around the Black Sea

I know that some tracker upgrades to turboprop have been attempted, do you know if they had been successful. I like this air group especially the AEW aspect ,it would have been well balanced .Spending on upgraded equipment is often less politically dangerous than spending on big ticket items [new carriers] that do not always attract votes.Can you tell me which planes would have been in the hanger and what & where on deck pls.

Various Carriers

Hello Analyo-I checked out the Thai site & found the pics. of the Chakri were great, however the writing was hard to understand.
Hello Pioneer-There have been some interesting designs on this thread, most of which I never thought I would see, but the one you posted is the most unusual, I can now see that there were many people with designs for small carriers spawned by the arrival of the Harrier.I am glad that the RN or RAN did not waste money on this one.
Hello Badger 1968-A decision was made on 25thFeb,1982 by the Aust. Govt. to buy the HMS Invincible which had been offered for sale, the total cost being $AUD478 million. This did not include the Sea Dart & a study was commenced to examine the implications of buying it also installing a Phalanx CIWS.The RAN was not commited to having to buy the Sea Dart installation. It was all a waste of time as the deal was scuppered by the Falklands War.
I have wondered what would have happened if the Aust. PM Malcolm Fraser had not offered to let Britain withdraw from the sale.I imagine that Britain would have kept it regardless. It has been speculated that Fraser was glad to get out of a deal that had little political gain at the time & was bound to be an election issue.He lost the election anyhow & the deal would have been scrapped in one way or another regardless.