And here they are, looking as great as ever, surely one of the most beautiful jets built…………..Chris L

Why are you posting them back to the person who actually took them?

The Airliners.net watermark is there for a reason. Check the originals.

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?airlinesearch=Lebanon%20-%20Air%20Force&distinct_entry=true

TJ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_forces_casualties_in_Afghanistan_since_2001

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/OperationsFactsheets/OperationsInAfghanistanBritishForces.htm

Sens,
You’ll have to do much, much better than that. What relevance does your links hold? You appear to be oblivious as to what is going on?

If you ignore Bob Ainsworth’s mistake on Harriers on Op Telic the following is very relevant.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm081117/text/81117w0031.htm

’17 Nov 2008 : Column 136W

Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Tornado aircraft would be required to undertake the close air support being provided by Harriers in Afghanistan. [236005]

Mr. Bob Ainsworth: 8 Tornado aircraft will replace the 8 Harrier aircraft deployed in Afghanistan.

Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reasons the Harrier force is being withdrawn from Afghanistan. [236194]

Mr. Bob Ainsworth: As announced by the then Secretary of State on 16 June 2008, Official Report, columns 677-78, the Harrier force has been continuously operational in Afghanistan since November 2004 and has proven time and again its value in defending the lives of our troops, our allies and those they are there to protect. Mindful of the strain that this extended deployment has put upon the crews, their families and the wider role of Joint Force Harrier we have decided to withdraw the Harriers from Afghanistan and replace them with an equivalent force of Tornado GR4s.

Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the cost additional to that of normal peacetime flying tasks of (a) continuing to sustain eight Harrier GR9 aircraft on Operation Herrick and (b) deploying and sustaining eight Tornado GR4 aircraft on Operation Herrick. [236548]

Mr. Bob Ainsworth: The financial costs for continuing to sustain eight Harrier GR9 on Operation Herrick are estimated to be £30 million p.a. This cost includes, for example, fuel, forward and depth maintenance, associated equipment support and is based on current levels of activity. The costs associated with sustaining eight Tornado GR4 on Operation Herrick are estimated to be £31 million p.a. on an equivalent basis. The cost of deploying Tornado GR4 to Operation Herrick is up to £40 million.

Normal peacetime flying is reduced commensurate with the amount of flying conducted on the deployed operation.

….’

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/DefenceSecretaryAnnouncesAfghanTroopIncrease.htm

TJ

Someone has to be right, when someone has to be wrong.
It is no coincidence, that the Harriers are deemed no longer necessary, when the WAH-64 did become combat ready. 😉

Sens,
What are you waffling about now?! Since when did the Apache replace the Harrier in UK service? The Tornado GR.4 will be replacing the Harrier in Afghanistan. Fixed wing and rotary complementing each other in the direct support role to troops on the ground. The UK CAS commitment in Afghanistan can’t simply be fulfilled by Apache/Reaper alone.

TJ

http://britains-smallwars.com/Sierraleone/Operation-Palliser.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Palliser

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barras

Illustrious and Fort George had been diverted from NATO exercises in the Bay of Biscay, with RAF aircraft embarked for the exercise. Aircraft of both NoIV Squadron and 801 Naval Air Squadron made a number of patrols in support of the mission.

Too late for Sierra Leone as you claimed, but it will overtake some Harrier roles now.
Britain also ordered the type in 1995, with the first of 67 Briticised “WAH-64” Apache helicopter gunship for Britain’s Army Air Corps performing its first flight at GKN Westland’s Yeovil facility in July 2000. The first eight in the set were built by Boeing’s Mesa, Arizona, factory, and the rest are to be assembled from kits by GKN Westland at Yeovil in the UK. Introduction to line service was in May 2005, with the Army Air Corps having 16 in the inventory at the time, and deliveries are to be complete in 2007. The WAH-64 will replace the Westland Lynx in the anti-armor and attack roles.

Sens,
Why are you repeating the details back to me with links? It is quite obvious that you had never heard of Op Palliser and had to complete an internet search for it. It is quite obvious that you had never even heard of Sea Harrier/Harrier support missions as part of the Sierra Leone mission.

The aircraft were deployed as a show of force to get the attention of the local warring factions. The Harriers were also conducting photo-recce missions for force disposition.

[QUOTE=Sens;1334538]

For Europe yes, but for the UK not. The last skirmish to British naval aviators in some usefull way was 1982. 😉

Or Sierra Leone where Sea Harriers and Harriers were required to provide CAS/show of force support.

Images of the Shadow G-JENC dropping flares.

http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3996

It´s nothing special. Do you remember the AGM-45 Shrike? The MAR-1 is something like that, old tecnology, old stuff. I bet China has something better to offer.

During 1982 the Brazilians removed a Shrike from a Vulcan after it made an emergency landing. Looks like it gave them a nice little bit of technology to experiment with?

Not correct. In the meanwhile every country with a coast-line has an economical zone. With that the police duty is expanded to that. 😉
It does allow to identify and control or ships and aircraft passing there. When the right of free passage is not affected.

Sens,
Yes, certain countries due to geography have variations. At the last count some 112 nations have the 12nm limit. Nations can proclaim airspace outside the 12nm limit, but it has no authority to legally keep other nations military aircraft out of that area. You can restrict the airspace inside the 12nm limit, but only have a warning zone outside of it. In regards to U.S. or NATO aircraft that declared zone isn’t going to keep them out. They can bump their gums all they like, but if the mission requires them to enter all the way up to the declared legal limit they will.