JAJ,
Sorry, but I can't let some of this stuff go unchallenged. I worked with the RAF for over 9 years, work with them now and unreservedly consider them the most professional air force in the world. Bar none. But your reply..?
The RN did not can FA2 - the MoD did, at the suggestion of the RAF. God help us, some RN types even agreed, but it was an RAF decision - after all, they owned the aircraft by that time. The money was needed to fund the over cost and under funded GR7 to 9 conversion programme. Sort of ironic that the money saved then went to waste when the rest of the Harriers were canned...
The decision to can the Harriers is done and dusted. I lament it, but there it is. However, to put the choice in your way is intellectually dishonest. Retaining the Harrier force would give us a lot more than 12 aircraft, as you well know. It's like saying that keeping Tornadoes gives us 8 aircraft in theatre. Similarly, calling a Harrier 'short range, limited weather', while indirectly saying that Tornado is a 'long range' aircraft is laughable. Tornado is a very, very good strike aircraft, but long range? No. And in any case, I was under the impression that Typhoon has an excellent strike capability, according to recent RAF press releases.
Calling the people who signed up to the letter a 'gaggle' is another cheap shot. Looking at the list, there are more than a few that are not ex-Navy. Paddy Hine and Peter Squire for example. Both distinguished and respected people.
However, the thing I really dislike is your snide reference to a 'floating runway/gin palace'. A carrier is a floating air station, plus command centre, plus lots of other capabilities. More than a runway. It's a fighting unit, goes to war, in harm's way if required. Very many of my former service colleagues (RAF and RN) have done that very thing. I'm sure that you'd be upset if someone referred to Bastion as a 'beer tent'.
Come on, let's raise the tone here a bit. If you can't, happy to take it outside, via PM.
Yours ever,
Engines