Neartheend,
Sadly Jointery achieves exactly the opposite. it exacerbates inter-Service rivalry, is expensive in terms of staff effort and attempts to achieve a common base for standards and practices (usually the lowest common denominator). One could argue that Haddon-Cave, and thus the MAA, has raised the bar on assurance - in particular in terms of "competent authority".
I would argue that in order to be assessed a competent authority to safely assure operations from the sea you would need to be able to assure each aspect - from stoker providing the fuel, to the Officer of the Watch on the Bridge, to the team manning flyco etc, to the aircrew manning the aircraft and thence to the CO of the ship authorising the flight. I would go on to argue that the only way to guarantee that assurance is to have an embedded capability in the RN. Such an embedded capability could then assure the occasional visit by a CH47 etc, effectively by surrounding it in "cotton wool" of expertise of the host organisation.
This host organisation needs to be grown (ie career managed) with maritime experts who live and breath ops from the sea.
I don't think it has anything to do with inter-Service rivalry, just common sense. In these constrained times capability needs to be embedded where the best level of assurance can be given. I simply do not believe the RAF have the interest or culture to embrace true maritime operations from the deck of a ship.
But then I would say that wouldn't I.