Reply to thread

Message

GL: the UK/France Memorandum initiating AFVG on 17/5/65 envisaged 175 UK/125 France and that determined UK's design leadership on airframe. The split was never made clear between Aeronavale's and AdlA's variants and RAF's and FAA's, in part because at that time only CVA-01 had been approved by Ministers. CDS Mountbatten had not yet come clean on his schemes for CVA-02 and 03. When he retired, 2/66, Chiefs sacrificed CVA-01 so FAA AFVG lapsed. By 26/6/67 Dassault was able to cite weight growth, hurting Aeronavale's variant, as decisive to cause France to withdraw and AFVG to lapse. There was no FAA variant of UKVG.

[QUOTE="alertken, post: 131485, member: 393"] [i]GL[/i]: the UK/France Memorandum initiating [i]AFVG[/i] on 17/5/65 envisaged 175 UK/125 France and that determined UK's design leadership on airframe. The split was never made clear between Aeronavale's and AdlA's variants and RAF's and FAA's, in part because at that time only [i]CVA-01[/i] had been approved by Ministers. CDS [i]Mountbatten[/i] had not yet come clean on his schemes for [i]CVA-02 and 03[/i]. When he retired, 2/66, Chiefs sacrificed [i]CVA-01[/i] so FAA AFVG lapsed. By 26/6/67 [i]Dassault[/i] was able to cite weight growth, hurting Aeronavale's variant, as decisive to cause France to withdraw and [i]AFVG[/i] to lapse. There was no FAA variant of [i]UKVG.[/i] [/QUOTE]

Verification