snickers Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 External differences between the two versions. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 This has been discussed in probably more detail than you'd magine here. HTH, Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Unfortunately, that thread never really answers the original question. It's a 3 page slap fight about the differences between the the 65% and 100% LERX. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Fleming Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 External differences between the two versions. Basically Aircraft with the 100% LERX - none Arcraft with the 65% LERX - they have the 'frog eye inlets' above the wing There is another very minor difference (to do with antenna) that I can't remember now Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kstater94 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Actually, doesn't it have more to do with the differences in the engine and avionics than the LERX? GR.9's have a more powerful engine than the GR.7's I think the 65% LERX was mainly on GR.7's and the 100% was found predominately on GR.9's (but I've heard some say that there were GR.9's flying around with 65%) Also, weren't the "frogeyes" introduced on aircraft with the 100% LERX because the new LERX covered the original fire access holes? (which was usually on the GR.9) I have also heard one of the main difference between the two is the GR.9 was wired for Sniper and the GR.7 was not... I'm sure someone will correct any of this info, it just seems that it has never been an easy answer... Regards John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spike7451 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) Actually, doesn't it have more to do with the differences in the engine and avionics than the LERX?GR.9's have a more powerful engine than the GR.7's I think the 65% LERX was mainly on GR.7's and the 100% was found predominately on GR.9's (but I've heard some say that there were GR.9's flying around with 65%) Also, weren't the "frogeyes" introduced on aircraft with the 100% LERX because the new LERX covered the original fire access holes? (which was usually on the GR.9) I have also heard one of the main difference between the two is the GR.9 was wired for Sniper and the GR.7 was not... I'm sure someone will correct any of this info, it just seems that it has never been an easy answer... Regards John The GR9 has are 2 additional air scoops behind the LERX.The Sniper pod was introduced to the GR9 because the existing TIALD pod was not up to the job down in Afghanistan.That's basically it. Thanks to P.M for the photo's. Edited February 4, 2011 by spike7451 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MikeC Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Actually, doesn't it have more to do with the differences in the engine and avionics than the LERX?GR.9's have a more powerful engine than the GR.7's .... A bit more complex than that unfortunately. Don't forget that the 9 was an upgarded 7, not a new build. The GR7 and GR9 had the same engine. The more powerful engine was in the GR7a and subsequently GR9a. ... it just seems that it has never been an easy answer...Regards John Amen to that! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Netz Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 So in modeling terms what is the external difference, the added scoops to the wing?? Curt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spike7451 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 So in modeling terms what is the external difference, the added scoops to the wing??Curt Yes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FIGHTS ON Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) I worked at Cottesmore when the GR7's were being slowly replaced with GR9's. I must confess to not spotting the new scoops, but what was noticeable was the paint scheme seemed to be a lighter grey. The GR7's seemed to be nearer a US gunship grey whereas the newer GR9's seemed to be coming back into the fleet in a lighter shade. (of course this might just be ALL harriers coming back from deep maintenance). In addition the GR9s had a little "GR9" insignia on tail. the tail numbers (in white) were the clue as to whether the bigger engine was fitted. So a number ending in an "A" signified either a GR7A or a GR9A. I believe the engineer's call this "fleets within fleets". If you wish to model a Harrier as was in Afghanistan then it should be a GR7A or GR9A. Ideally a Navy Strike Wing Harrier, operating from the ship would also have the bigger engine (esp in warmer climates). Link to nice phots of GR9s (notice "paler" grey, "GR9" logo on tail and the "A" on some tail numbers) GR9. Here's a Fleet Air Arm (Senior Service!!) GR7A - note darker shade of grey, no scoops etc. NSW GR7A All academic now of course courtesy of a Strategic Defence Review (in English = cuts!). I see there is one up for sale on EBAY! EBAY Harrier Edited February 4, 2011 by FIGHTS ON Quote Link to post Share on other sites
snickers Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) OK so basically the additional 2 scoops. I have the revell 144 kit, Gr.7 Harrier. The scoops are molded. And as you know they have AV-8B+ as well. So I have to remove those scoops to make it a Gr.7, and ignore it to be a Gr.9. BTW, I have read a thread before about Harrier load out. Is it true that the pylon/station aligned to the wing LGs should not be loaded w/ any air-to-air missiles? They say it will burn/damage the wheel when fired. Edited February 10, 2011 by snickers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bobski Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 BTW, I have read a thread before about Harrier load out. Is it true that the pylon/station aligned to the wing LGs should not be loaded w/ any air-to-air missiles? They say it will burn/damage the wheel when fired. I don't think that is true. I've seen pictures of GR7s carrying AIM-9Ls on those stations throughout their career, both operationally and in training. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.