STOVL
Keeping pilots CTOL current is no mean task. You’d have no chance of keeping a mixed RAF FAA force, and UK doesn’t want to pay for a huge dedicated air wing. French pilots rely on the US to keep their skills up. Cat/ trap costs, and it requires a lot of man power to keep it running. STOL set ups like the Russians and Indians will use are incredibly inefficient on deck space, sortie rates and also impose weight restrictions. One could say they go for that option because of a lack of an adequate alternative?
The US is rich enough to build carriers that have 4 cats, and the space for simultaneous landings and take off. No other country has built a carrier that big. Even PA2 won’t be up to that. Without it sortie rates plummet.
Weight issues aside, the B might be short legged compared to the C, but doesn’t look too bad when compared with contemporary jets. A huge proportion (over 90% I think) of the world’s human footprint is within 200miles of the oceans.
I understand that the UK strategy matches that of the USMC. Fight from your CV initially and then follow the forces inland to keep sortie rates high. The B can rough strip, which is very useful – as demonstrated by the Harrier in Stan. Keeps response times down and utimately the number of bombs dropped high.
While dispersal is less of a requirement since the end of the cold war, it certainly got the Israelis interested in the B. who to say it won't be useful to the UK again with the lifespan of the project.
The B might be limited to 2*1000lb internally but could carry more externally. This is the max for the current Harriers and smaller weapons appear to be growing in popularity. I understand that the B could carry 1 stormshadow.
If the B does meet its targets, I do think it is a good flexible fit for what the UK requires. It’ll do everything that the UK requires, and will compliment Typhoon well.