I'm with @Little J, foolish not to marinize all new UK helo's.RunningStrong wrote: ↑08 Dec 2022, 22:47But that's precisely the kind of gold plating that means we end up paying massively more and not getting the advantage of the larger airframe commonality with allied force users. It's precisely why UK Apache force was horrendously expensive.Little J wrote: ↑08 Dec 2022, 22:20 Sorry, I didn't do a good job of explaining my thoughts...
Whatever replaces Puma long term, should be able to fold-up for easy deployment, whether it be via Carrier or C-17 (or anything else that i cant think of at the moment). I confess I don't know if the standard Valor can wing fold, but surely it would be better to only have one type in service, rather than -A, -B, -C, etc?
The STOVL comment was in joking reference to F-35's all so far being claimed by the RAF
A V280 wouldn't need to be C17 transportable, it has a ferry range of 2000 miles. Chinook has been stowed in QE2 hangar without folding, would need to do a compatibility check to see if it fits down the lift.
The carriers will be one of the primary places for them to operate. Not sending Puma to sea had more to do with them falling over than lack of requirement to do so.
Not sure that would imply folding or not. Rather depends on how the European Merlin etc replacement program turns out. Probably yes.
Apache AH1 being so expensive for so little extra was not caused by any Naval requirement. More the switch in engines and UK build. My understanding is that the replacement Apache will be marinized.