Originally Posted by
Just This Once...
Are you seriously suggesting that the F-35's role is to provide CAPs for a task force?
Short legs, no AAR, limited AEW and low aircraft numbers make an uncomfortable 24 hour defensive capability for a UK TF. The USN can do it but our capability falls considerably short of the mark.
The UK's vision is for carrier-enabled strike - aka floating airfield. It requires other ships to provide defence for it. Using an F-35 to provide defence against small boats is equally questionable.
That's the problem - once they are out there do you expect the SO in charge of the Carrier Group to sacrifice CAP cover, however limited, over strike? It's a multi Bn quid ship, named after the Head of State and Flagship of the Navy..... They will totally prioritise its defence at the cost of anything & everything else
PS I'm not a fan of the Carriers but even so they cost around £ 7 Bn to build and have 1600 crew on board - that's a lot to risk without ensuring they are kept reasonably out of harms way in normal ops... Think of the Falklands and "Burma Star" Woodward.... and he had TWO platforms