Easy Street
Perhaps Mr Cummings forgot to tell the US Navy and the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy these things? Now why is it the nation that produces DF-21 is building carriers? Why was it that NATO asked for the UK to commit a carrier to the NATO Response Force? Something to do with task group operations?
Thousands of souls aboard? Where? Perhaps a bit more attention detail?
Surely Col Boyd's work related (primarily) to aircraft fighting each other within visual range? Some hardcore disciples wanted the F-16 to have neither radar nor missiles!
Also you forget:
1. A carrier is not the only high value unit in a task group. There might well be amphibious forces, or important RFAs, or crisis response shipping. What is the best way to protect them from aircraft with anti ship missiles, that they can fire from beyond the range of any ship based surface to air missile? How do you protect them from submarines most effectively?
Perhaps
this page from the USS Dwight D Eisenhower Strike Group might be informative?
2. Once upon a time I was planned that the Royal Navy's main role in NATO would be to provide ASW. Large 'through deck cruisers' were intended to carry multiple ASW Sea Kings. Then of course there was a need to counter the Soviet Bear maritime patrol aircraft, and there was a conveniently sized V/STOL aircraft that could be navalised.
Just think about this - when HMS
Hermes operated Sea Harrier FRS1, Harrier GR3, Sea King HAS 2 and a few Sea King HC4 in the South Atlantic in 1982, she launched and recovered jets in some pretty nasty weather. If she had still been operating Sea Vixens and Buccaneers - or a replacement (small) CTOL jet, could she have achieved this? Could the RAF have provided rapid reinforcement without a V/STOL aircraft?
weemonkey
Errr.... Not sure what you mean!
pr00ne
I wonder what great parliamentarians from the past like Churchill or Attlee would have thought of all these special advisers?