Frankly Lost - I think that anyone with more than one brain cell can see that you can't argue your way out of a paper bag - your constant cut, paste and fatuous comment technique is a masterclass in confused thinking and deformed logic.
For example, your conclusion that because the procurement system made errors with the Nimrod and Chinook 3 the RAF should therefore not be allowed to make a bid for SARH is childish logic to say the least.
Another example of your inability to see what is before you - your reply to my comments about the MCA not knowing about the difference in aircraft capability was to snipe at the RAF technical advice on offer - the period we are talking about is your last 20 glorious years of Bristow/MCA SAR where no RAF technical advice was sought or given. Another great expose argument debunked!
Most of the rest of your 'arguments' follow the same ridiculous pattern - the only one you got right was about Bristows lying - I was just having some fun with that one
The rest of your post is the same drivel - you really are delusional if you think that you have demonstrated inconsistencies and spin in my arguments by making ill thought out, uninformed and embarassingly wild accusations about topics you have little knowledge of.
BTW is there a new law that you can't live where you work?
