[/QUOTE] In the Australian context, I find it incredibly interesting that the Navy is being supplied with aircraft carriers, and we seem to be coming up with strange names and weird excuses as to why they shouldn't be equipped with aircraft. There is nothing surer than the fact that, despite its great range and weapon load, no F35A will ever operate offensively or defensively in support of these large aircraft capable warships because they simply won't be able to be where the ships are. The F35B will be able to operate from these ships, and its weapon load and range will be infinitely superior to the F35A in that scenario. IE: the ships will be capable of operating "blue water" and that is the intent of their acquisition. I say again, the F35A will not be able to operate wherever the ships go, therefore buying just the F35A will be consigning Australian troops and sailors to battle without air cover![/QUOTE]
Hit the nail on the head! We will not have a true expeditionary capability without organic FW air support. What we will have is a deployed force vulnerable to air attack, and soldiers with no CAIRS. The only way to turn our 'humanitarian carriers' into proper warships and the nucleolus of independent task groups is to purchase and embark appropriate numbers of F-35B. This would also make the RAAF fighter force operationally relevant again.