Had the RN gone to the RAF at the original design stage of the CVF and agreed that the RN would do what they are best at, driving and operating warships, and allowed the RAF to provide the tailored air group (FW) for deployments, along with rotational positions in key posts such as Wings, SATCO, DSATCO, Eng Officers etc, then their may have been more support for the project.
Sorry, proud fish'ead, but I have bit..... I could not let this one go unanswered. Whilst I agree with some of your sentiments, you view is, if I may be a little impolite..naive. Your comments forget about the history between the two services since the late 1970s and seem to state that the RAF are the best at flying. The Fleet Air Arm, does what it does best....generating air power from the sea and the long history the UK has, in generating air power from the sea, demonstrates that you CANNOT do it PART TIME. If there were a maritime branch of the RAF, that conducted its operations predominantly from the sea, then your argument could hold water (scuse the pun). I hasten to add that I am NOT an advocate of disbanding the RAF and add that there are areas of RAF capability in which they excel above the other two services.
But as we are talking about air power from the sea, I will confine myself to that. You also mention about the other support areas. This is again difficult and a previous 1SL was keen to point out to good old Glenn, that the RN also has a wide support infrastructure to support maritime operations that the RAF does not. CVF will need "sea-minded" personnel from all areas not just pilots and back seaters of whatever colour. The RAF does not have an Aircraft Handling branch, who are the teams that look after the aircraft on the deck and who the FAA specialist fire-fighters, the RAF does not have a dedicated MET branch, whereas the RN has the HMs who have wide and deep experience of providing Met and Oceanographic support at sea. The RN ATC branch have broad experience of controlling from the sea, in the wide ocean and the Littoral, often without the aid of diversions and with basic equipment. Senior Air Department officers are drawn from squadrons with wide experience of operating at sea who are aware of all the extra challenges that operating from the sea imposes, including storm force winds, deck operating limits, runways that move and bounce about, logistics (ammunition, fuel, food, liquid oxygen etc) There are other supporting branches of the FAA, including engineers, bomb bosuns, photographers, aircraft controllers to name just a few. Whilst I remember, don't forget the fighter controllers, who served with distinction in 1982 and 1991 and in many areas since. They are all part of the wider FAA that support operations from the sea and for the RAF to replicate them would be hugely expensive and take years to build up the level of operational capability the FAA has accumulated over many many decades. Additionally, they are all ship's staff when embarked, with responsibilities beyond their primary duties....that only a career training in the RN will provide.
So, it is very easy to say that it does not matter who pilots the aircraft, but there are a whole host of other factors that underpin generating air power from the sea. IMHO operating air power from the sea is best left to the FAA. Operating from a fixed land base, is best left to the RAF and the Army. Everyone has something to bring to the table. It is unfortunate that when one area appears to be getting a new toy, everyone else gets jealous and want to play with it.
