Yes so shit, that’s why it’s well regarded, has a high kill ratio, and has been active in basically every conflict since its entry into service.
Sounds like the F-15, ohh wait 4 have been downed lmao.
The sea harrier has the most kills per airframe compared to every other modern fighter btw.
Argentinian pilots were trained by the French. They had also previously trained with Spanish harriers.
Not only did they A: have experience fighting the type but B: had proper training from a good airforce
wild how one of the most common premiums is modelled so badly.
However you haven’t done us any favours because of last summer. Things may have gone faster without that
2 Likes
that is an outdated fighter nowadays bro…
harrier isnt modern. its a 60s plane from a time where real combat could happen. drone age says no to that now
Well, Shar that’s a late 70s fighter and is from the same time as the F-15-16-18
And yes they are all outdated by today
based on a mid 60s airframe. only 7 years younger than phantom ii in platform. so really its the generation prior to the eagle.
harrier 1 overall only got like 23 kills. to zero combat losses so still very good. the F-15 wins by a couple per loss.
Thats… unfair to the argentinian pilots and untrue about the skyhawk in comparison to the harrier as they are like 14 years seperated from first flights.
Yes the british pilots and harrier were vastly superior in capability and training but thats not to discredit the argies attempt at stealing islands.
The Mirage 3ea is the more direct comparison
It’s of the same generation as the Shar in airframe. It’s also the plane that confronted the sea harrier in direct air combat.
The Gr.3 and the sea harrier are not the same performance wise although they are similar.
Pretty sure you could send basically anything with 9ls strapped to it into combat and it would have performed just as well as the harrier
Every 9L shot during the Falklands was taken rear aspect in a way that the 9G could have managed.
The argies had shafir 2 iirc basically the same capabilities as the 9G
no lol. however a higher altitude ceiling capable fighter would have made things much easier. Harrier outperformed pretty much all planes of its day at low speed low altutude scenarios.
from pilots own accounts it whether they have 9G or 9L it wouldnt have mattered much as all the kills were side and rear aspect.
The argies themselves deemed it superior to the Mirage 3ea in all close combat maneuvers up to 25,000 feet.
This was after facing Spanish matadors too.
Trials in Area 51 with the USMC flying AV-8A came to the same conclusion vs the MiG-21.
The Me.262 is separated from the Gloster Gladiator by less than the same measure.
Mirage 3 and harrier 1 do that comparison
I get youre a harrier hater and have beef with matrix but comparing world war tech evolution to the rather dry pre vietnam era is a very bad faith comparison
Hold on are you saying they’re the one who leaked sekrit dokuments on the Harriers? That’s crazy
yes that was matrixrupture.
That’s funny as hell lmao
(not that it’s a good thing to do, but still super funny to think about)
3 Likes
I’m just pointing out that 14 years difference is a pretty large timeframe in terms of aviation history.
I also wouldn’t consider the pre-Vietnam era of jet development to be dry.
tbh no era was really dry, or they all were in comparison with the 40s
1 Like
The mirage 3E entered French service in like 1965 the harrier Gr.1 was 1969
That’s not 14 years
2 Likes