One reason that Merlin's payload if more modest than the Chinook's is that it is built to modern standards of crashworthiness.
It'll have nothing to do with the three engined miracle's MAUM of 15 tons v its zero fuel wt of 10.5 tons and the Wokka's 24.5 MAUM v 12.5 ton ZFW then?
Or did I miss something in basic helicopter design class. Is the R22 actually the safest helicopter flying because of its modest payload? Do modern safety standards dictate that a crap capablity equals high safety standards.
The type didn't win the Presidential Helicopter competition for nothing, either.
Jackonicko, are you really that gullable, how did it get AST 404 in the first place - politics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You may not be aware that on a number of occasions, people have walked away from crashes that would have been fatal in a Sea King or a Chinook.
What is the basis of this sweeping statement? Which fatal Chinook and Sea King accidents would have been survivable in a Merlin and vice versa? I'll be happy to go through all the RAF Chinook ones with you.
Well it is doing well in sandy places, taking a lot of the strain from the other platforms. Availability is high and the speed and range is popular with the customers, as is the cabin room.
Lucky the happy customers have a choice, Merlin or walk.