The UK Sea Kings have been built in the UK by Westland (or whatever their current name is) since the early 1960s.

As the deal included full re-design and export rights, they are now built to European standards, and are only “cousins” to the US-built ones.

Since all the equipment on the Trenton is set up to support the US standard helos, and the systems are all designed to mesh smoothly, it is only logical to buy 6 US birds for it.

Otherwise, a lot of equipment would need replacing, and the cost would rise dramatically.

“BTW: the A400M has a top-speed very close to that of some jet-transporters.”

REALLY?????
When was the flight test that produced that speed?

Until those tests are conducted, you really should use the words “planned to have a top speed”, “supposed to have”, or “designed to have”… as even with the modern techno-whiz-bang, “gee whiz aren’t these CAD programs great we don’t need any real-world testing”, “fire the human engineers the computer can design it all” aircraft industry, sometimes planes just don’t fly the way they were meant to!!

Don’t start claiming actual performance until it actually does what you claim it can!!

“Its kind of F-16 lite. But then, did the ROCAF already have genuine F-16 lites?”

Not then, but as soon as the IDF entered production, the US sold them “down-rated” F-16s at the lowest price that new production Falcons had been sold for, then or ever!!

Since just 2 years earlier a Taiwanese request to purchase them had been refused, it was clearly a deliberate attempt to kill off domestic Taiwanese fighter production, and apparently it succeeded!

I have always thought that this would have been a better choice for Indonesia and Malaysia than continuing to buy F-5s & A-4s, and then F-16s & Mig-29s, etc. They could have had a manufacturing share (Indonesia has a well-developed aircraft manufacturing industry since the late 1980s), and would have been able to afford more aircraft, and to maintain them better.

Not to mention the tiny little fact that Taiwan has never been under the actual, real-world control of Communist China (only in their fantasy world)… and therefore is in reality a parallel state with the PRC, with both having been formed out of separate portions of the old China.

Neither has any legitimate claim over the other… any resorting to an argument of “ethnic priority” (all Chinese must belong to one China) is invalid, as to argue otherwise would demand the re-formation of an “Ethnic Germany” of Germany, most of Austria, and parts of Poland and the Czeck Republic that were last one nation under Hitler… and many other such examples!

Taiwan is Taiwan, not “Democratic China”, and can legitimately become part of the PRC ONLY by the unforced consent of its population!

Likewise, Taiwan can make no legal claim to any part of the PRC, they can only claim what they have controlled since 1950!

That is reality… no matter what the positions of those European nations that would rather “look the other way” to forceable PRC take-over of Taiwan than risk a military confrontation over those outdated notions of “Will of the People”, “Right of Self-Determination”, “International Order”, and “Deterrence of Aggression”… you know, the very things the UN was formed to protect!!!

The Coast Guard buying Dolphin SAR helos in the late 1980s didn’t result in any more US sales… the CG is often buying “one-off” types that the other services won’t touch!
After all, its needs are different.

Operations in Iraq have shown that there are many jobs for a “intra-theater-sized” transport smaller than the C-130.

The Army has had problems with getting the USAF to schedule C-130 cargo runs with only partial loads, forcing the Army to choose between waiting days for enough cargo to build up to “justify” a C-130, or wearing out their CH-47s by using them for this purpose. (The USMC has their own C-130s, so have not had this problem.)

Since many of these cargos are of priority loads such as ammo, food, and parts for inoperative combat equipment that are delaying or weakening planned missions, they have been flying their Chinooks about twice as many hours per month than is really sustainable.

Therefore, there is a real need for something in this size range, the problem was that as soon as the Army asked for more than a “one-for-one” replacement of the Sherpas, the USAF claimed this was a breach of the laws governing Army aviation, and demanded that all of the new lifters be given to the USAF!

Apparently, a compromise has been reached, with the Army getting enough to make them happy, and the USAF getting a bunch for themselves. This is also a reaction to DOD deciding not to purchase the last 20 or so C-17s that the USAF had wanted. Apparently the plan is now to ease the usage rate of the C-17s (and C-130s) by getting ~100 small lifters to deal with those short-range, small load flights that really wear out an aircraft (take-off & landing are far more damaging to an aircraft than flying “straight & level” at 25,000-30,000 feet).

I don’t know the exact Japanese rank structures, but here is how it goes in the US.

A US Navy Captain is actually an 0-6… an O-3 is a Lieutenant.

O-1 Ensign
O-2 Lt. Junior grade
O-3 Lt.
O-4 Lt. Commander
O-5 Commander
O-6 Captain

The US Air Force, Army, and Marine Corps ranks.

O-1 Second Lt.
O-2 Lt.
O-3 Captain
O-4 Major
O-5 Lt. Colonel
O-6 Colonel.

I think the C-27J would be an excellent choice if the new domestic aircraft is cancelled for whatever reason.