Originally Posted by
Autorev
To High Spirits point
Stick 3 Bob tanks (another 7200kg of fuel) in a Mk5 Chinook and you have, indeed, overcome the range issue.
Just what payload are you going to be putting in that a/c? Not an F135 Power Module- internal or external, that’s for sure...
You are still trying to make the spurious case, apparently based on opinionated ignorance, for spending a fortune we don't have on V-22s we might covet but don't actually need. Apart from QEC (
not QE2 please people! 
) being able to carry a huge quantity of spares owing to her size, a whole new
MARS capability is being procured for the RFA including four Tide-class tankers and three Fleet Solid Support ships.
Then there is the Chinook with its considerable VERTREP underslung load capability.
It's not as though any of this is new for the RN:
Playing along for a moment...
Genuine question. Despite its re-supply by air constituting a glaring red herring, how much does a PW F135 engine for an F-35 actually weigh?
Originally Posted by
Autorev
...I totally agree that the UK cannot afford a V-22 capability exclusively for COD/MITL, but what’s the plan?
NAO report earlier this year recognised this failing, but we are yet to hear how we avoid QE becoming an ‘exquisite irrelevance ‘....
Here's the NAO report on QEC dated 16 Mar 2017:
I can't find any sign of
"COD",
"V-22" "spare engines" or
"exquisite irrelevance" in it. This key finding on page 8 is the closest it comes and is hardly surprising for a project of this size and complexity:
10 Successful operation depends on a mix of equipment, support and infrastructure, but plans for some of these are not yet mature. Alongside the core equipment programmes (carriers, Lightning II and Crowsnest), the Commands are responsible for ensuring that crucial enabling capabilities are in place. Improvements to Portsmouth Naval Base and RAF Marham to accommodate the carriers and Lightning II jets are progressing well. However, new support arrangements to provide spares and maintain the equipment are less developed. Operating Carrier Strike will rely on logistics, communications and surveillance. While the Department has advised us that it is normal to prioritise investments according to strategic need, the Commands have yet to fund all of these capabilities, which could restrict how Carrier Strike is used (paragraphs 2.31 to 2.37).
As NAB states:
Originally Posted by
Not_a_boffin
...No-one expects Carrier Strike to leap fully formed from the wrapper. It's going to be an evolutionary process. Much like most large procurements.
Only the next 40-50 years will tell. Sadly, I don't expect to be around for most of them.
