I think the Harrier is a weapon looking for a mission. This plane is skittish, noisy, and vulnerable, yet it is supposed to provide close air support for frontline Marine units.

The Harrier's one moment in the sun was the Falklands War, when the Brits scraped together a force of about 20 of the "jump jets," which were probably the decisive weapons in that short conflict, now 20 years in the past.

In simple terms, these aircraft amount to precious daggers, ideally to be used highly selectively for critical missions, because of their relatively fragility.

And that's not really the kind of weapon you'd think the Marines would want for duty near the front lines, but it's capabilities are unique, and the Marine commanders must think the risks are worth having the mobile firepower at their immediate disposal.

Nevertheless, I really don't think complicated systems like the Harrier or Osprey are the best choices for front-line duties. In particular, it is very difficult to maintain a high level of readiness, won through intensive training, when you're using systems which are unreliable and require a high level of maintenance and tuning.

Nor has it been established that front-line marine units need organic, fixed wing aircraft, imo.

sp