Engines,
All very good points. But no one from the FAA has yet come forward with either 1. the reason why they haven't been able to fully man their 2 tiny sqns for the last 25+ years, or more importantly 2. given this record how they're going to fully man an embarked wing of Daves. It's all very well hoping that you can call them Joint sqns and expect the RAF to pick up the slack (yet again), but you might be even harder pushed to persuade the young blades at Valley that it's a great idea to go Harrier / Dave now there's a Typhoon option because that way you get to go to sea a lot...
I have no issue with the RN getting some new big boats. But it seems crass to my small brain to buy the 2 biggest things we've ever had, and just gaff off any serious amphibious capability. With hulls that size there must be room for a well deck & some troop carrying capability. But the RN would rather have a quarterdeck and the illusion of a US level of naval air power projection. In the same vein, I still don't understand why Ocean was procured with a rail all around the deck - was it intentionally to deny themselves the option of having Harriers / Daves on board and having the capability to send a single ship to an area of interest with troops, vehicles, helicopters and some organic CAS. If you've got a relatively small number of assets, then surely to achieve maximum effect in as wide an area as possible, don't you want them to be jacks of all trades? Did the RN honestly look at the USN/USMC Marine Expeditonary Units and think 'nah, don't want that capability'?
Single Seat, Single Engine, The Only Way To Fly