Sea Harrier FRS.1

[Flame2512 3,384]

Introduction

With the latest update introducing various members of the Harrier Jump Jet family I feel it is appropriate to suggest the Sea Harrier FRS.1 be added. The Sea Harrier FRS.1 was the first Harrier developed for the Royal Navy. It had primary role of fleet air defence, and a secondary role of ground attack. It is one of the most well known Harrier variants due to it's prominent role in the Falklands War.

 

What was Sea Harrier?

The Sea Harrier FRS.1 was a development of the Harrier GR.3, with only the minimum required changes being made to adapt it for use as a carrier-borne fighter. The Sea Harrier had about 90% commonality with the Harrier GR.3, with the aircraft being largely untouched from the air intakes backwards (with the exception of some components being switched for corrosion resistant replacements). The Pegasus 104 engine in the Sea Harrier was essentially the same as the Pegasus 103 in the Harrier GR.3, just with navalised components to prevent corrosion.

 

Where the Sea Harrier differed substantially from the Harrier GR.3 was everything from the rear of the cockpit forwards, which was largely re-designed. The key addition was the Ferranti Blue Fox radar with gave the Sea Harrier its distinctive pointed nose. In addition the Sea Harrier received a new digital navigation and attack system, and the cockpit was entirely redesigned. The cockpit floor and pilots seating position were raised by 11 inches to allow room for the new avionics units under the floor, coupled with a new bulged canopy this significantly improved rearward visibility. Other smaller changes were also made to the Sea Harrier such as a more powerful Reaction Control System (the air jets used to manoeuvre when in hover mode), a slightly changed tailplane, a new ejection seat, etc.

 

What it offers over the Harrier GR.3

The most obvious improvement over the Harrier GR.3 is the Blue Fox airborne radar, which was capable of detecting ships and aircraft, but lacked look-down capability over land and rough seas. The Blue Fox interfaced with the Harrier's navigation / attack system and was able to provide "computation and display of all air-to-surface weapon aiming in manual and automatic release modes; solution of air-to-air aiming equations; display of air-to-air aiming" among other things on the aircraft's HUD. That confirms it retained the ballistics computer functionality of the GR.3 and suggest it should be able to provide a lead indicator. The improved cockpit layout could also be useful for those playing in Simulator Battles.

 

Armament is another area where the Sea Harrier improves over the GR.3. All the GR.3s weapon load-outs were retained (including some not currently in game; i.e. 2" RP rockets), however the Sea Harrier had AIM-9 Sidewinder capability (AIM-9G or AIM-9L) built in (as opposed to it being a rushed modification to the GR.3). The most important upgrade over the Harrier GR.3 comes with the Sea Harrier's "Phase I" upgrade. Despite the Sea Harrier's excellent performance in the Falkland's War the conflict had highlighted some deficiencies in the aircraft, mainly the radar and air to air weapons load. While the Sea Harrier FA.2 was in development to fix these issues a "Phase I" upgrade was carried out on the Sea Harrier FRS.1s, the main change of this upgrade was support for four AIM-9G or AIM-9L sidewinders, as can be seen in the spoiler section below. As can be seen the Sidewinders are fitted on dual launch rails, so do not require you to forgo carrying ordinance on the inner wing or fuselage pylons in order to carry four Sidewinders.

 

The "Phase I" upgrade programme lasted 1982 - 1987, and from 1988 - 1995 Sea Harrier FRS.1s were upgraded to FA.2 standard, therefore although the capability to carry four Sidewinders was not part of the original Sea Harrier, FRS.1s did spend at least half their service life (or more) able to do so.

 

Harrier GR.3s sent to the Falklands were modified with AN/ALE-40 flare / chaff dispensers on route, and it has them in game. Various forum posts on the internet mention Sea Harriers receiving the same modification, and that would logically make sense. However I have not found any photographs of the AN/ALE-40s fitted to an FRS.1 yet; so if anyone has photos or other proof they were fitted then that would be very useful. There is circumstantial evidence that they could be fitted, seeing as the rear equipment bay (where they were fitted on the GR.3) was as far as I know unhanged between the GR.3 and FRS.1. The Sea Harrier FA.2 could also have AN/ALE-40s fitted in the rear equipment bay. So the Sea Harrier FRS.1 airframe could likely fit AN/ALE-40s, it is just hard to find conclusive proof it actually happened (not helped by all but one of the FRS.1s being upgraded to FA.2s).

 

"Phase I" modified Sea Harrier FRS.1s:

Spoiler

 

Weapons loadouts

As mentioned the Sea Harrier largely retained the Weapons loadouts of the Harrier GR.3. Here is a diagram of the different weapons types the Sea Harrier could carry as of 1978.

Spoiler

 

There are a few things to note with this diagram. Firstly each line in the diagram shows where the weapon type which can be carried; combinations of different weapons can be carried, for example Sea Harriers are usually photographed with fuel tanks on the inner pylons and Sidewinders (AIM-9G or AIM-9L) on the outer pylons. The diagram dates from before the "Phase I" upgrade so does not include the dual sidewinder launch rails. Carrying two sidewinders did not restrict the other pylons from being used for ordinance, as can be seen in the Phase I images above; various Sea Harries can be seen carry four AIM-9s along with fuel tanks / rocket pods / bombs. The diagram also omits some of the more obscure weapons options, such as the WE.177 nuclear bomb. Finally the Diagram lists SNEB rocket pods; while the Sea Harrier could carry Matra 115 / 116 SNEB pods (with 18 or 19 rockets each respectively) it was far more common for them to use the No.7 2" RP pods, each carrying 36 2" RP rockets. This was apparently due to fears the Matra pods could be unintentionally fired by interference from the radars of  Royal Navy carriers. Here is a picture of a Sea Harrier with the No.7 rocket pods:

 

Spoiler

 

Flight performance

The Sea Harrier FRS.1 will perform very similarly to the Harrier GR.3 in game. The airframe is largely unchanged and the engine is essentially the same, the Sea Harrier may be slightly heavier due to the additional avionics it carries.

 

Here are the specs from AirVectors (supported by Fleet Air Arm Museum)

Spoiler

 

 

Sources

There is a Sea Harrier FRS.1 pilots notes document available for purchase online, but I don't have it. Here are the text and web sources I used in writing this suggestion:

The British Aerospace Harrier Case Study in Aircraft Design by John Fozard (Harrier Chief Designer)

Sea Harrier - A New Dimension by Terry Ford

Fleet Air Arm Museum - British Aerospace Sea Harrier FRS1

AirVectors - First-Generation Harriers / Sea Harrier

Wikipedia - British Aerospace Sea Harrier

Edited November 22, 2020 by Flame2512
Added weapons load

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

Hello Flame2512,

 

Thank you for your suggestion, however you haven't included a weapon specifications list of the aircraft type. As such, this suggestion doesn't meet our minimum requirements. You will have 48 hours to add the required information. Failure to do so will lead to this topic being hidden and archived.

 

Thank you for your understanding.

 

Open for discussion.

Edited November 22, 2020 by Miki_Hoshii

[Flame2512 3,384]

1 hour ago, Miki_Hoshii said:

Hello Flame2512,

 

Thank you for your suggestion, however you haven't included a weapon specifications list of the aircraft type. As such, this suggestion doesn't meet our minimum requirements. You will have 48 hours to add the required information. Failure to do so will lead to this topic being hidden and archived.

 

Thank you for your understanding.

 

@Miki_Hoshii I've added a Weapons loadouts section now.

[HyJetV 3,063]

Would absolutely love to see the FRS1 in game, and would like to see the Phase 1 modification as an unlockable modification to research.

 

now that we have harriers in game, a specific naval model is needed, that, and the fact the FRs1 (and FA2) as you mentioned, we’re designed for air 2 air combat, unlike the two GR variants we have in game.

 

You have all my yeses for this, the FRS1 is my fave Gen 1 harrier, it’s to pointy and sleek.

[Grand_Moff_Tano 3,460]

Sea Harrier for the win! Would love to see this and it's American counterpart (AV-8B).

[Flame2512 3,384]

2 minutes ago, Erusea_Stronk said:

Sea Harrier for the win! Would love to see this and it's American counterpart (AV-8B).

 

AV-8B is more of a counterpart to the FA.2 / GR.5

[Dan_RAFBC 1,201]

Hands down, full yes from me. Can't wait for this beauty.

[HyJetV 3,063]

6 minutes ago, Erusea_Stronk said:

Sea Harrier for the win! Would love to see this and it's American counterpart (AV-8B).

 The AV8B was/Is a Gen II Harrier, equivalent to the British FA2 or GR5/7/9.

[Mitchverr 875]

!00% would love to see it. I am honestly surprised gaijin didnt add it as a "first batch" harrier into the game simply because of its role (fighter) and iconic history for Brits.

[_PhoenixFire_ 13]

I mean, it's physically impossible for me to say no to this being added. Would love to make skins for this. It's a yes from me!

[Milocat 4,854]

Definite +1 from me, as an important, iconic, and just all-around cool aircraft.

[TerikG2014 1,389]

Always a yes for the Shar!

[_Pixy 196]

I'm a simple man, I see VTOL I +1

[ShizuRin 636]

The plane won Falklands. I guess FA.2 will come when gaijin introduces all-aspect IR missiles.

[Ein79 5,749]

Fully support! (4 Sidewinders)

[Asghaad 2,476]

i think you cant include the upgrade because that would mean only AiM9 Lima ... which is a BIG no-no for air RB for the moment and probably why the Sea Harrier wasnt put ingame.

 

3 hours ago, ShizuRin said:

The plane won Falklands. I guess FA.2 will come when gaijin introduces all-aspect IR missiles.

plane was crap as we can see ingame (and if you dont consider this game relevant go see Growling Sidewinders dogfight duel with F/A 18 in DCS on youtube ...) what won the Falklands were good pilots and AiM9 Lima that was total game changer in air to air combat ...

[TerikG2014 1,389]

1 minute ago, Asghaad said:

i think you cant include the upgrade because that would mean only AiM9 Lima ... which is a BIG no-no for air RB for the moment and probably why the Sea Harrier wasnt put ingame.

 

plane was crap as we can see ingame (and if you dont consider this game relevant go see Growling Sidewinders dogfight duel with F/A 18 in DCS on youtube ...) what won the Falklands were good pilots and AiM9 Lima that was total game changer in air to air combat ...

Actually Lima had very little to do with it all AA kills were achieved from Rear Aspect and form angles that AIM-9G could have achieved and the  Shar was hardly "crap"  probably the best subsonic carrier fighter that was in service at the time.

[Flame2512 3,384]

39 minutes ago, Asghaad said:

i think you cant include the upgrade because that would mean only AiM9 Lima ... which is a BIG no-no for air RB for the moment and probably why the Sea Harrier wasnt put ingame.

 

plane was crap as we can see ingame (and if you dont consider this game relevant go see Growling Sidewinders dogfight duel with F/A 18 in DCS on youtube ...) what won the Falklands were good pilots and AiM9 Lima that was total game changer in air to air combat ...

 

The launch rails used for the AIM-9G and L are the same, so you could give it four AIM-9Gs. Phantom flight manuals suggest the UK continued using the AIM-9G alongside the AIM-9L until the early 90s, so as well as being physically possible to fit four AIM-9Gs, it is not outside the realms of possibility that it could have been done.

Edited November 23, 2020 by Flame2512

[TerikG2014 1,389]

8 minutes ago, Flame2512 said:

The launch rails used for the AIM-9G and L are the same

Not entirely true they had to file down the G launch rails to accommodate the different canards on the L

[HyJetV 3,063]

1 hour ago, Asghaad said:

i think you cant include the upgrade because that would mean only AiM9 Lima ... which is a BIG no-no for air RB for the moment and probably why the Sea Harrier wasnt put ingame.

 

plane was crap as we can see ingame (and if you dont consider this game relevant go see Growling Sidewinders dogfight duel with F/A 18 in DCS on youtube ...) what won the Falklands were good pilots and AiM9 Lima that was total game changer in air to air combat ...

 

Please dont bring your frustration with the Gr1 into this suggestion.

As you have been told many times, the GR1 in game is not a dedicated fighter. The FRS1 (and FA2) are the only two harriers that had true air to air capability.

 

Lastly, the 9L can be forgone with the Phase 1 Mod, and if implemented, the upgrade would only see 4 9Gs as opposed to 2.

[Asghaad 2,476]

1 hour ago, TerikG2014 said:

Actually Lima had very little to do with it all AA kills were achieved from Rear Aspect and form angles that AIM-9G could have achieved and the  Shar was hardly "crap"  probably the best subsonic carrier fighter that was in service at the time.

 

it had very much all to do with Argentinian Mirages avoiding Harriers like a plague after one got blasted out of the sky by the Lima ...

 

also being best of the bunch of crap doesnt make not crap being subsonic in 1980s = near useless to the point that if not for Lima the Argentinian Mirages (supersonic fighter jets from the sixties) would have made mincemeat out of the Harriers ...

 

most kills were from rear aspect because all Harriers were shooting down were antiquated A-4 Skyhawks ...

[Asghaad 2,476]

49 minutes ago, HyJetV said:

 

Please dont bring your frustration with the Gr1 into this suggestion.

As you have been told many times, the GR1 in game is not a dedicated fighter. The FRS1 (and FA2) are the only two harriers that had true air to air capability.

 

Lastly, the 9L can be forgone with the Phase 1 Mod, and if implemented, the upgrade would only see 4 9Gs as opposed to 2.

 

what frustration, i love the thing at 9.7, challenging to fly and powerful just enough to challenge other 9.7 which are now mostly supersonics

and the only major difference between GR3 and FRS1 is the radar in the nose ... while that is a nice feature it will make next to zero difference in Warthunder unless they give it its gun lead indicator.

 

sure we can forgo the Lima and give it 9G ... then how will it actually differ from GR3/AV8C ? 4 missiles instead of two, radar and gun lead indicator would put it at 10.0 at minimum where it would be matched 1:1 against T-2, Jaguar and other supersonics.

 

[MajloActual 31]

Would you like to see it in it's "Phase I" upgrade configuration (can carry 4 Sidewinders instead of 2)

I would prefer to have both as separate vehicles, so that we'd get one Phase I upgrade and one not.

I'm not a huge fan of making modifications all just be the same vehicle (having them be separate also means they can be balanced accordingly).

[Flame2512 3,384]

21 minutes ago, Milou_ said:

Would you like to see it in it's "Phase I" upgrade configuration (can carry 4 Sidewinders instead of 2)

I would prefer to have both as separate vehicles, so that we'd get one Phase I upgrade and one not.

I'm not a huge fan of making modifications all just be the same vehicle (having them be separate also means they can be balanced accordingly).

 

But then you are effectively earning 380,000 RP and paying 1 million SL (plus the cost of spading) to get an aircraft which is completely identical to the one you had, with the exception of getting two more missiles.

 

I can see an argument for having "Phase I" as a researchable modification (like the Q-5B is a modification of the Q-5A, and gives you an RWR + flares). Or only add the "Phase I" version, and balance based on that (you can also give it 2 AIM-9Gs as an alternative load if you wanted).

[HyJetV 3,063]

1 hour ago, Asghaad said:

 

it had very much all to do with Argentinian Mirages avoiding Harriers like a plague after one got blasted out of the sky by the Lima ...

 

also being best of the bunch of crap doesnt make not crap being subsonic in 1980s = near useless to the point that if not for Lima the Argentinian Mirages (supersonic fighter jets from the sixties) would have made mincemeat out of the Harriers ...

 

most kills were from rear aspect because all Harriers were shooting down were antiquated A-4 Skyhawks ...

 

Indeed, if the Argentine Air Force had aircraft capable of the range, or the Falkland Islands lay closer to Argentina, the Sea Harrier wouldn’t stand a chance.

Unfortunately for the Argentines, many factors played a part in their loss, it was nothing to do with AIM9Ls

 

The harrier was designed to be subsonic, in an ever growing supersonic era, due to its specifications, of being able to take off from anywhere, in the event of all out war, as we all know, the first targets in war, would be airfields.

 

with this in mind, the harrier could be moved closer to the battle, rather than flying from afar, so if you could be closer to the battle, why be supersonic and waste all that fuel, when you’re already practically there?

And the sea harriers scored many kills with the 9G, and yes, they were against ‘antiquated’ attackers, because that’s all the Argentines had, to fight at that range.

1 hour ago, Asghaad said:

 

what frustration, i love the thing at 9.7, challenging to fly and powerful just enough to challenge other 9.7 which are now mostly supersonics

and the only major difference between GR3 and FRS1 is the radar in the nose ... while that is a nice feature it will make next to zero difference in Warthunder unless they give it its gun lead indicator.

 

sure we can forgo the Lima and give it 9G ... then how will it actually differ from GR3/AV8C ? 4 missiles instead of two, radar and gun lead indicator would put it at 10.0 at minimum where it would be matched 1:1 against T-2, Jaguar and other supersonics.

 

In the other topic, however, we’ll leave that out of this suggestion.

 

yes, that’s one of a few differences between the GR series and the FRS.

 

yes, it would make negligible difference in the game, however, it would give the FRS the ability to pick aircraft up on radar, helping a lot in Sim Battles.

 

How would it differ? I mean, 4 missiles are better than 2, gives you the chance to rack up a couple more kills.

Edited November 23, 2020 by HyJetV