Like Occasional Aviator, I too use the actual classified figures. The newspapers/media are being lazy in using those of individuals who are deliberately obfuscating the truth.
The fact is that the land based French aircraft provide more time over Libya per aircraft than does CdG.
Do not conflate numbers of bombs dropped with effects achieved. The Dual Mode Seeker Brimstone has been instrumental in clearing out the armour/artillery in urban areas. On the same argument, numbers of sorties does not equal effect.
The full quote from the CBS link was:
"On U.S. carriers we trap about 160 aircraft a day at sea, but here it's just 35-40 a day," he said. "Also, on U.S. carriers we're able to launch and trap aircraft at the same time, but because of the shorter size here we need to close the carrier deck for each operation."
The 35-40 will be a maximum number and will include all sorts of sorties not just those that conduct A-G support. The inflexible launch windows and days off will also reduce this number. The down days are at sea.
The costs you quote are the capital costs (based on purchase price) – they are not what are used for in year funding – that is the c4k per flying hour I quoted. If you were to attribute the full cost of the aircraft purchase then your future cost arguments for a JSF equipped QEC would be astronomical.
Sharkey always use the capital charge figures because of the higher cost of Typhoon so early in its life when divided by hours flown to date. He won’t use them when the JSF arrives! Also, he conveniently forgets that the Tornado is cheaper than Harrier.
The time on task would be effected by the transit time (mitigated mostly through AAR), but the Harrier has the shortest endurance of the three.
Your roaming Carrier will have some very dull aircrew on board as they will have had limited opportunity to train at the top end of their skill sets. A USN CAG is at the peak of its powers just as it deploys and then gracefully degrades thereafter – most CAGS would not stay at sea for longer than 6 months because of this.
An empty ship could roam the oceans looking for a fight. However, the aircraft can move 500nm in an hour, rather than a day. Because the poilitical decision to act came so late against Libya (a matter of hours before the first strike) the Carrier would have had to prepare and sail openly many days/weeks before the politicians were ready to commit. Only UK based air strikes gave the political choices needed in this case. Remind me again how long it took Ocean to fly a single AH sortie after it left port?
Of course a land based operation requires logistic support. However, are you honestly saying that a land supplied operation on the European mainland using trucks is more expensive than the running costs of the RFAs?