Page 1 of 1

It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:05 am
by an-225
Harrier ownership - is it LEGAL? I want to see if I can acquire a Sea Harrier FRS.1 (consider the variant, this version is not a killing machine like the FA.2 or AV-8B II and people have acquired "tame" aircraft, such as the DeHavilland Sea Vixen and North American F-86 Sabre). Furthermore, once acquired, is it legal to fly (and eventually VTOL) it? I believe because of its poor glide rate, it is not allowed to fly over London.

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:09 am
by Mictheslik
In america....yes

not sure about Australia though ;)

.mic

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:29 am
by C
Ownership is legal, flying it may not be, depending on your location (and whether or not you are a multimillionaire).

I want to see if I can acquire a Sea Harrier FRS.1 (consider the variant, this version is not a killing machine like the FA.2 or AV-8B II


I think more people were killed by FRS.1s than by FA.2s - just ask the Argentine Air Force and Navy.

The other problem is that most FRS.1s became the FA.2s.

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 10:14 am
by expat
I believe because of its poor glide rate, it is not allowed to fly over London.


Poor ;D, it does not have one ;D

Matt

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:27 pm
by Isak922
I know in the States that it's legal to own MiG-21's and such. Just can't pass the sound barrier within 20 miles of US land (Overseas, and over 20 miles out, you could probably ask ATC permission for it).

I've also heard rumors that there's at least one Civilian owned Su-27 State-side. Not sure if it's ever flown though. Would certainly be a nice "toy".

Some people have Ferrari's and BMW's.... He has a Sukhoi Heavy Fighter ::)

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:30 am
by an-225
I know in the States that it's legal to own MiG-21's and such. Just can't pass the sound barrier within 20 miles of US land (Overseas, and over 20 miles out, you could probably ask ATC permission for it).

I've also heard rumors that there's at least one Civilian owned Su-27 State-side. Not sure if it's ever flown though. Would certainly be a nice "toy".

Some people have Ferrari's and BMW's.... He has a Sukhoi Heavy Fighter ::)


Pffft, getting an Su-27 is easy. You upscale Revell of Germany's Su-27 model (which is part T10) and add all the crucial parts to make it fly. The Airfix FRS.1 lacks surface detail, and the Italeri SHAR has poor fit issues (I am guessing on both accounts). ;)

Thanks for the help guys, this provides a helpful insight into Harrier ownership for me.  :)

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:26 pm
by Ashar
I dunno how you'll afford a multi million dollar Harrier, but good luck...Post some pics! :D

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:17 pm
by mrjake2002
I'd go for something gentle... like a Chippie!

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:55 am
by Layne.
I would rather get my hands on an F-22 ::)

But heaps of people own guns as protection why not a harrier ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:19 pm
by Craig.
A little insight into harrier ownership. Hovering a harrier for any period of time will require upon landing, a full engine strip and overhaul, which I believe is a rather long and difficult job when done by the RAF's finest. ;)
Good luck with that.

Reality is, not only is the plane one of the toughest and most dangerous military jets to fly, but it is also one of the most labour intensive.

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 9:48 pm
by Dr.bob7
its pry legal, BAE pry just tears the weapon mounts off and sends it to you

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:12 am
by an-225
Do they ship it in that foamy squiggly packaging? Lol, that would be great, thanks for the info. ;)

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:33 pm
by Souichiro
Now I thought I read something about a EE lightning being made flyable in the U.S.?

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:10 pm
by C
Now I thought I read something about a EE lightning being made flyable in the U.S.?


A T.5 was being restored in Mississippi. It hasn't flown so the only airworthy EE Lightnings are in SA at Thunder City...

Here's a link:

http://www.lightningusa.org/about.html

Re: It Has Been Discussed, But Just to Clarify

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:45 pm
by expat
A little insight into harrier ownership. Hovering a harrier for any period of time will require upon landing, a full engine strip and overhaul, which I believe is a rather long and difficult job when done by the RAF's finest. ;)
Good luck with that.

Reality is, not only is the plane one of the toughest and most dangerous military jets to fly, but it is also one of the most labour intensive.



Depending on the air temperature you are generally limited to 90 seconds. Why 90 seconds, thats how long you have in water quantity (50 gallons) that is spayed into the combustion chamber so that the engine does not require the above strip down. However, here is the shock part of Harrier ownership. The engine will require strip down as a matter of course after 500 hours..................if you manage to get it that far in the first place. The Harrier's Pegasus has so many STI's, SI's and general maintenance that you will always find something that will require an engine change well before 500 hours. Also don't forget, the wing has to come off. Back in my days of life in a blue suit, we would recon three days to change one with an experienced crew.

Matt