Although some of what I say below is covered by Not_a_Boffin's reasoned and much better informed post; I am still going to inflict you with my bank holiday musings.
If I recall correctly a hybrid arrangement was 'briefly considered' but dropped on cost grounds in 2000. One of the arguments for the increased size of the ships (over the original plan) is flexibility for future 'enhancements' on the 'steel is cheap and air is free' principle, but as in most projects it's way cheaper to do things up front. Add to that no serious contingency planning and not having a contractual requirement, even though the convertibility allegedly contributed most of the extra cost of the Delta option chosen. During the SDR 2010 dalliance with CATOBAR and F-35C the delivery date was said to be 2023. EMALS, however, is still not meeting the required level of reliability for the USN,so I assume that means two cats are going to have to be fitted that plus a probable angled approach is going to eat a large proportion of currently available deck parking (or can UAV bolters be assumed to avoid striking the ramp?). I do wonder if a STOVL/F-35B combo was partly required to justify continued UK F-35 participation, An all C buy would never make sense but a split A/C (or A/B) purchase would have brought diversity costs - CATOBAR from the start would have probably led to a cheaper less capable aircraft e.g. F/A-18, Rafale M or Typhoon M when the financial screws were tightened. That would have brought all the problems associated with a small RN only fleet e.g. getting enough pilots.
One thing I don't think has been mentioned is the MQ-25's (extended) wing span, at 23 metres it is more than double that of an F-35, 25% more that a Merlin's rotor diameter, and almost a third of the QA's overall beam. The more I think about it, the less likely I believe it will be the UK UAV AAR solution. My concern is whatever comes out of Project Vixen will be a Jack of all trades and ...
I assume the Osprey RoRo refueling pod rules out the US DoD having any undisclosed plans to operate UAV tankers from LHAs. It seems to me to make sense to supplement or replace AAR from Ospreys but the assumptions are probably: a CVN will always be in range to supply AAR if needed; littoral ops do not require a dedicated resource to provide the additional range/endurance. If they do have, it would be in the RN's interest as the LHAs' decks are c. 20m shorter than the QEs'. Though I believe the realistic solution is to find the money for some Ospreys for COD and podded AAR. It is clear, however that the UK MoD message is, 'if it CAN be done by a UAV it WILL be' i.e. 'FMAF, the rapid transformation of crewed aviation roles (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, Communications, Lift and Strike) to uncrewed'. RN aircrew are an endangered species.
Originally Posted by
Asturias56
I don't think getting them off a medium sized vessel is a big problem - firing things of all sizes is something Navy's do rather well - it's getting them back on that requires space and (possibly) go-round areas
Asturias - 'twasn't ever thus; I was musing on the Walrus at the weekend (MTOW c. 3.6 tonnes), which could be catapulted off a light cruiser, in those pre-RW piston-engined days recovery by landing on the oggin and crane was the only option; even in these days of autonomous UAVs that's almost certainly out of scope for a jet-powered fw aircraft.
