I had a briefing on the UK program in 2002, by which time the ships had grown to their current size and features like automated weapon-handling had been adopted. This was just before a decision was taken to stay with STOVL - at the time, LM and BAES/RR were all a bit worried that if the UK went CATOBAR, the USN would cut the Marine STOVL buy to pure Harrier-replacement, which would make it economically vulnerable.
I made the point at the time that the CV version's range might be desirable. But nobody was thinking EMALS at the time, in the UK, so you needed a separate JP-powered teakettle.
No sooner had UKG decided to stick with STOVL than the JSF weight crisis hit, of course...
Per Mr Boffin's point about carrier experience... By that time, it was 30 years since Newport News and the Navy had designed and built Nimitz, which in turn was a significantly evolved Forrestal. And say what you like about UK industry, but they seem to have done much better on the QEs than the US has done on Ford.