Originally Posted by Wrathmonk
In an historic agreement between the Chief of the Naval Staff and the Chief of the Air Staff, a joint RN/RAF fixed wing force, "Joint Force 2000", will operate from both land and our aircraft carriers. This will initially bring together the Sea Harrier FA2 and RAF Harrier GR7 into joint operating packages, but in future the RN and RAF both plan to operate a single, common aircraft from land and sea - the Future Carrier Borne Aircraft. No decision has been taken on the aircraft type, but the US Joint Strike Fighter will be a strong contender.
Which is, I'm sure most sensible types would agree, was the first nail in the coffin of the FA2 and the perceived loss of control of the FW FAA to the RAF. So with all respect to Slater he should perhaps look at what he started, on his watch, before chucking accusations about.
Your logic is flawed. If his eminently sensible plan had been respected by all parties, he wouldn't have had cause for complaint. How, for example, do the RAF's choice of aircraft and decision to ditch all the GR9s fit into it?