Good riddance to myopic and selective thinking. I stopped reading when I read the oft trotted lie regarding the Sea Kings doing all the work on Op Houghton. Strangely, I recall over 200 Royals being delivered by 5 CH47 in the first wave (and most of the vehicles in the second - though I seemed to have lost one somewhere....) while the SKs gasped to carry 6 each....oh, and for the umpteenth time, it WAS NOT an Amphib assault; due to the lack of grunt from the SKs and the fear of anti-ship mx, we disembarked and flew the first few waves from the Kuwaiti desert. To be absolutely honest, it would have been cheaper and quicker to just being the stores to a port and have shifted the whole lot via Chinook.....
Didn't see much mention of air cover to Overlord (including Fortitude), nor the Italy campaign nor the role of airpower in keeping Malta alive long enough for the (incredibly brave) sailors to deliver enough supplies to start interdicting Rommel's supply lines-but, of course, N Africa is airbrushed too. The role of the GR3s in 82 is ignored, as is MR, the Shrike missions and the stupendous efforts of BN. You'd think there were no CH47 in Sierra Leone either. Remind me again who pulled the Brits out of Lebanon in 06? Oh yeah, RAF Chinooks.....to Lusty. Because, whisper it, flying a capable helicopter with plenty of grunt onto a decent sized deck isn't that hard. Really, we should be celebrating the way the RN stitches together TAGs with an eye on the further integration of F35.
If the authors were not so keen to do a hatchet job, and be more balanced in their argument, then perhaps more notice would be taken. This paper has some important points to get across, but risks falling into "we're great, you're rubbish" territory.