FODPlod - re Atlantic Conveyor and the lost 3 of 4 Chinooks and 5 of 6 Wessexes etc. I think it depends on your point of view. You pays your money etc.
Following the "Handbrake" broadcast from Exeter there was lots of chaff in the air and having been decoyed by Ambuscade's the missiles acquired AC which had no defensive measures or point defence armament other than machine guns. So it could be down to lack of defensive fit.
If Hermes had still had a catapult she could have carried Gannets so the threat would have been detected earlier and disposed of by SHAR. So it could be down to lack of AEW. (My particular belief)
Later on SHAR 2 with AMRAAM could have possibly taken out the missile. So perhaps inadequate contemporary AAM fit. (I'm assuming there would have been a standing patrol if such a fit was available)
I assume there was no intelligence on the departure of the Etendards from Rio Grande. The routing using AAR to approach from roughly north-west seems to have come as big surprise. So perhaps lack of adequate intelligence and threat perception led to the AC being in a vulnerable position and the asset, Brilliant, that had a system designed to take out similar ASMs not positioned on the correct threat axis and Coventry was no longer afloat to be the forward picket north of the FIs.
A general observation is that the bulk of the SAM fit of the fleet was obsolescent (Sea Dart (except perhaps on Exeter)) or obsolete (Sea Cat and Sea Slug).
I think "a deplorable lack of air cover" is excessively harsh. With adequate warning SHAR would probably have eliminated the threat or caused the COAN/CANA pilots to abort. (On reflection I may have taken your comment too seriously
)
Apologies for the thread drift.
Regarding GWs1&2 my view is given the limitations of size and available equipment both the RAF and RN performed their assigned roles to the high standard one would expect