Can I add a second note of thanks to MM!
We should all pull together in applying air power most effectively and efficiently. Sniping between CV or land-based capabilities doesn't help - and, believe it or not, almost everone I know in the RAF supports the idea of having carriers.
Enines and ChiefTIFF, thanks for clarifying the eng procs. However, I do think it is a little outdated to imply that the RAF engineering hierarchy will immediately oppose any increase in flexibility. I have worked with the FAA and seen some good procedures, and although the RAF has some baggage to get over (as I'm sure we all do), lots of good people are making real efforts to improve things and there have already been several instances of best practice from the RN being adopted by the RAF (and I'm sure from the Army too, although I can't think of any at the moment). As for the JAP merely being RAF procedures writ large, I can assure you it is not - the implementation team was led by a REME officer, after all!
However, at the end of the day, using RAF orders and instructions in order to service, maintain and rectify RAF aircraft seems to be a no-brainer, if not an essential element of the safety management system!