Jackoniko
Sorry to disappoint you. Just because I am relatively new to this website it does not mean that I am a 12 year old spotter, or that I do not have a wide range of armed forces experience or knowledge.
Not only can you not do maths, you obviously have trouble reading too. (As I have previously mentioned I have worked closely with all of the services.) This has been both pre and post the Falklands. It has also included working at an RAF base where we shared the same hangar and operated virtually the same type of aircraft as the RAF. (A great opportunity to experience for myself the different ways that the RAF and FAA maintained and operated basically the same type of aircraft for exactly the same types of Army/Marines support tasks. It certainly was quite an eye opening experience and it was particularly interesting to discover that the RAF needed two different tradesmen to carry out the same types of work as just one of our FAA combined tradesmen.
During that time our four aircraft were sometimes carrying out not only their own operational tasks, but also those of the RAF aircraft. Particularly during one period when in fact 7 of their 8 aircraft were unserviceable! (So for those who recently commented about Army poor aircraft serviceability rates I can assure you that the same can even happen to the Royal Air Force!)
With regards to your following previous stupid comment about the other UK forces lower levels of training and experience: -
“The RAF has the support and engineering infrastructure required to get the most out of the most complex platforms, and to train their aircrew.”
It is not only the RAF that can get the most out of complex platforms and train their crews. You do not get a much more complex helicopter platform than the FAA version of the EH101, which uses a lot more different avionics and weapon systems. These are even operated and maintained on smaller ships for very long periods of time away from any land based support. They also somehow manage to do that without any need for RAF personnel to be present.
The same can equally be said for the Harrier, including the Sea Harrier which also had very state of the art avionics and weapon systems!
Furthermore, when ‘any’ of the UK armed forces require in-service repairs for very seriously damaged helicopters anywhere in the world (including for serious battle damage), I suspect that the FAA still provides the highly trained and experienced structural repair teams to carry out that work. (Even for the RAF!) If I remember correctly, some AAC technicians also sometimes joined those teams as well! Therefore, the FAA and AAC are not as useless as you often state.
With regards to another one your previous stupid digs at the other UK Forces: -
“The chain of command understands and knows how to use air power. It does not mis-use assets, and does not allow aircraft to be diverted to act as the Colonel's taxi”
You must have been seriously drunk when you also made that very blinkered statement. I, like many other people, (including honest RAF personnel) could quote many equally bad (if not worse) examples of the RAF mis-using assets, but I will spare the RAF’s blushes on that subject!