Here we go again! We're back to the old RAF argument that land-based air assets are more effective at power-projection than carrier-based ones. If that's the case, why are the USN and USMC happily building what appears to be an almost complete set of carriers - and the Russians and Chinese are joining in?
It makes total sense to have the carriers but you have to be willing to spend the money properly like the USN/USMC/China/India and not the half-arsed cheapo attempt that we are turning it into. Why go for Dave B? When the ships are large enough for a catapult and arrestor system, why build the Type 45, a ship eclisped in capability by the Spanish Alvaro de Bazan-class. The 45s won't even have an anti-ship capability. It's just sheer tokenism at a time when we can't afford it, Britain used to the rule the waves, and we can't anymore, carriers are the wrong equipment at the wrong time.