The challeng may indeed prove too difficult.
I am at a loss to undertsand why this non-sequitor of a carrier strike policy has come about. I do think HMG has scored some massive own goals with these announcements, even if we give them the benefit of the doubt given their ovrall ignorance of detailed defence issues, and reliance on the MoD staffing process to deliver these proposals.
Surely a more "Trenchard" like approach of maintaining at least a sliver of capability in all CVF related roles would have been achievable at a similar cost. In particular it is hard to believe that maintaining one op sqn of GR9s was not possible, no doubt at the expense of maybe at least one sqn of Tornado/Typhoon. This seems even more logical given the announcement that FCVF will only have a regular 12 ac JSF complement. The resulting maintainance of skills for CVF ops over the next 10 years, the continuance of VSTOL capability should we need it on-shore (never minds its continued use in Afghanistan) - all seem to have cried out for this - and the politicians would have had a more credible argument for their decisions!
There is no doubt a classified paper lurking in Main Building that will one day explain all...but probably to no one's satisfaction.
Ah Well......
