It sounds as though FLynx will be an excellent replacement for grey Lynx HMA3/8.
And for the No.847 Squadron 'Commando' Mk 7s.
It's an excellent replacement for grey Lynx. You've missed the point re 847 Sqn though. It will not be a good thing for them. If anything, they may get the BRH not SCMR. Unarmed (fitted for but not with) with a limited cabin space. Hence why 847 may have a shaky and uncertain future.
You might even think that 70 FLynx would be about the right number to do the above (expanding the amphib attack/ISTAR/utility capability by a squadron, perhaps).
62 airframes. 34 BRH/28 SCMR. Expanding? Nope, it's a reduction. Its half the current fleet of green Lynx (apples and pears comparison though as one hopes serviceability will be a bit better and not so many will be christmas trees).
And it sounds as though FLynx isn't a bad way of augmenting the over-tasked and under-strength Apache force. (Mixed FLynx/AH Regiments, anyone?)
That may be all well and good for current ops but again I dont think so. If anything, it will ease the load on other platforms currently being used in the ISTAR/MAS role.
Totally agree regarding mixed regiments (some very good points from Frontseater).
How is the size of the Flynx order rationalised? How many squadrons is it supposed to sustain?
If you break it down on the BRH side, not very many. Possibly no more than a few fielded squadrons. If (and its a big if) 847 use BRH, that leaves even fewer for the JHC.
Anyone know what the Lynx crews are going to do in between current Lynx out of service date (2012) and BRH ISD (2014)? I dont think eight Mk9GTs will cover the gap especially as we have to give the engines back to AW to stick into FLynx.