I can't be bothered to trawl through all the pages of this thread so some of the following may be a repetition of others work, sorry, but to be honest, I'll still be amazed if we ever see these ships in service.
The parallels with the late 60s are incredible. They are vastly expensive to build and operate, we will be trying to design and build a new generation SSBN, new reactor and new "N" weapon all at the same time, we have several foreign operations which need to be funded, the economy is not looking great for the next few years and the public/ treasury/ and some of the RAF (& even the RN) don't seem to see the need. I fully expect the next Government to look at the books, look at the requirement (and competing requirements) and cancel.
Hard choices will have to be made and I would sugget that the Carriers are easier to cancel than the development of the next generation deterrent.
It should be borne in mind that work (& therefore spending) on the next generation nuclear submarine reactor has already started. (I am told that the reactor in Astute can't be used in the next generation of N Subs - age of the design vs safety case limitations - If we don't have new reactor we are out of the N sub game when the current boats reach the end of their lives and I can't see that happening).
It should also be borne in mind that, in addition to new reactors we will need to have new warheads, for the next generation deterrent system (even if it remains Trident based) - We can't use the existing warheads much longer (safety case, again) & can't buy in from abroad (N Proliferation Treat etc). Weapon development cost alone will be huge.
In addition, eventually someone will wake up and see that the Carriers are massively operationally compromised. Not only will we have all our eggs in one basket but:
1. The force protection assets (ie the FFs & DDs) that are needed to accompany them have been cut.
2. There is no plan for indigenous air to air refuelling or long range/endurance AEW assets (I don't count the Sea King AEW & C helos as long range) thus increasing reliance on accompanying shore based RAF assets. If we have to have the shore based support for AAR & AEW then some in the RAF/ Treasury will probably argue that they can provide the stike assets from ashore, too.
3. JSF in its STOVL form may well not yet happen - the ships are initially planned to go to sea with the Harrier GR9 but as we have seen with current ops they are in very short supply. For the first few years of life the ships will have very limited utility without an Air Group and any plan for cats & traps will require another major rethink (I am led to believe that there is a contingency plan to fit cats & traps at the first major refit - more expense and probably very difficult to engineer in if the hull & systems have not been designed for it in the first place!!).
4. Crucially, the weapons designed for JSF (Brimstone and Storm Shadow) do not have a safety case for Replenishment At Sea (RAS) (and the required upgrades to achieve this have been taken as a cost saving measure) thus limiting the strike endurance to the limited outfit carried. A major shortcomming. (Similarly these weapons need to be taken ashore to be tested/recalibrated every 2 years (I think) & so will need to be landed ashore from alongside at somewhere like Crombie (Probably the only place possible & this makes Rosyth as a FOB even more likely, I would say, and adds to the support costs as in reality an extra "Naval Base" will have been created again)).
I remain a pessimist.
Regards