I am surprised that there is not more campaigning against the procurement of the new aircraft carriers, or is that a step too far in the inter-service contest to get the biggest willy?
We simply cannot afford the support vessels to defend a carrier that might be slowly taking our deployable air power somewhere close enough to the action to do what land based aircraft or RPVs could have done far more quickly and effectively.
If we want to think about another Falklands situation (pie in the sky because we simply do not have and will not get either the surface combat vessels or the merchant fleet to support it) we had better find a way to adequately protect the carriers. That option is far too expensive and manpower intensive.
So why are we simply delaying the carriers or is the planned early demise of the Harrier the way to show that we do not need a seaborne fixed wing aircraft?