For all the dark blue honesty and candour – thank you; this is the clearest sign I have seen that RN ambition is to operate all aircraft afloat. It would be useful if this was made more prominent in Whitehall, then we really could crack on. And this I am afraid is why this problem generates pages and pages of arguing around the buoy here.
The new “small and perfectly formed” combat aircraft force of 2020 will not have room for inefficiencies. Because of the small size of the fixed wing FAA it has always struggled to recruit and retain enough aircrew to meet the requirement. Hence the solution has always been for the RN to operate a cadre within an RAF owned and operated force. The Newton study made this quite clear, although it never really addressed the proportions allocated to each Service in a mutually satisfactory way. I understand the agreed split was 66:33 to the RAF - is that still true?
If the issue is the attainment of embarked skill sets, then both Services need to grow them on exchanges. If the issue is FAA growth and sustainment then Defence needs to see the full (additional) costs of what that means and the risks inherent in delivering it against a small force size.
Of course, the RN could just aim to take the lot! So which is it?