MM
A well reasoned post. The arguments regarding who drives the jets off the deck has been covered elsewhere - however as you know if there are no dark blue ones there will be no senior RN Officers with a fixed wing background, including CVF Captains and Cdrs (Air) as well as task group commanders, Flag Officers and their staff.
Like you I wondered why the RAF would propose this. I am cynical enough to wonder if this Government spin so when it does not happen people be relieved and the others cuts will seem less severe.
PN
A bit selective there WEBF.
Perhaps. However....
In coastal or near coastal waters against an SSC the SSN DS is probably essential. Without a CVF however you would not need the SSN there.
Don't know what SSC stands for. (Thick guess, you mean SSK - if not you've lost me.) However, in
littoral waters (ie someone else's coastal waters) you may well find the odd submarine regardless of the proximity of a carrier group...in fact that's their main operating environment these days.
I would be so bold as to say that no carrier can operate without escorts. A carrier operating aircraft has limited freedom of movement. It would need at least one escort to keep her company. It is true that a helo can do some of the jobs of an escort but a boarding party is best served by an escort - picking up several pirates for instance. Immediately you need to add an RFA to the mix. If the carrier is engaged in hot operations you probably need to add logisitics support. If you then take one escort out of the equation, you need a spare.
True, although Maritime Interdiction Operations are unlikely to occur during a hot war. I would suggest a hot, shooting war takes priority over most other commitments.
Soddim
I do not think, W E Branch Fanatic we speak a common language. Combat is joined when the enemy shoots back. The Argie aircraft did not because they did not come armed with AAM to the fray. If the Argies had been able to employ fighter sweep/escort the outcome might have been very different.
Their commanders told them to avoid the Sea Harrier. So you consider aircraft engaging incoming attack aircraft as non combat as there was not fire going both ways?
The Harriers did not defend the carriers - the Navy used geography instead - they kept them safely out of range. Neither did they adequately defend the ships - the Argies got bombs in 17 surface ships - fortunately, they did not all fuse successfully.
The Sea Harriers provided the outer layer of defence for the task group. Apart from the incoming bombers that got splashed, the Shar was credited by a post war study (by either the USN or USAF) of preventing over 450 Argentine sorties as the Argentine pilots evaded the Shars instead of pressing their attacks home. As to the fusing issue, the Argentines were competent so why did they fly so low that they had fusing problems? Something to do with keeping out of the way of the Sea Harrier (not so good at looking down on targets, particularly over land) and shipborne radars/missiles.
Likewise the Sea Harrier was a major part of the defence against the Super Eterndards with Exocet. With only five aircraft and five missiles they were careful not to risk interception. If the RN had been equipped with organic AEW back then it would have reduced the success of the Argentine low level approaches.
Deliverance
FFS don't say "Crusade".
