The ASTOVL vs CV argument continues to amuse (and sadden) me. I am not an aircraft designer, but can only assume that if you want to carry a lift fan, then you have to trade in some bombs and fuel. This, to my simple mind, means that when viewed against the bloke flying the CV variant you will be riding a less capable strike fighter.
Again I have not read the catalogue but one assumes that the more spinning machinery you put in the thing , the more expensive it gets. I do appreciate that Cat and Trap costs probably more than offset this.
The one thing that is a given for naval air power, and particularly Marstrike, is that if you do it on the cheap then you create compelling arguments for not doing it at all.
If we want a Maritme Strike capability then we should pay the going rate for one, which means affording CV aircraft flying from a CVF. Of course, most people reading this will be in the 'Yes, i agree we would welcome the capability, but there's only so much money in the pot' camp. So for 'we' read our chap Tony, who seems quite keen on having the things.
Whilst i have some sympathy for the 'It's a Harrier replacement so is therefore a success if it carries more than the Harrier' argument - i can't help but think that this would be akin to arriving at the Battersea Dogs' home and whilst being able to take home an Alsatian.....settling for a Poodle on the grounds that you were replacing a gerbil! (All figuratively speaking with no intended slight on drivers of the GR7).