The only problem with it is that it is written from the perspective of one who hasn't gripped the difference between how the USN and RN recruit and man ships.
To be able to realise the scale of manpower savings between QE and a US CVN you'd have to completely change their recruitment and training policy, not to mention their approach to ship operation and their accommodation standards.
One other point is that QE can get away with fewer people in the CAG (TAG if you're of a PC persuasion) because the deck is bigger than it would have to be just to cram aircraft in - the same applies to Ford. So "smaller" ship can actually mean more bodies if you want a comparable sortie rate.
The 3.5 from 11 actually means 3.5 fully available, deployed and worked up. It doesn't mean the other 7.5 are in bits, rather that they're in the US-based part of their operating cycle, letting the CAG and crew stand down and do the leave thing, prior to entering another training and work-up cycle.