FodPlod,
Your statement that these are 'specous requirements' is somewhat at odds with the view of US Navy who, you will be aware, have been in the carrier strike game for a considerable period of time.
Are you suggesting that the V-22 Osprey is not capable of delivering the F135 power module (with its bespoke sled designed for the purpose) over the threshold distance that was determined for the USN COD mission?
You may wish to familiarise yourself with the US Navy's Fleet Battle Experiment conducted last year to demonstrate this very capability.
The failing I referred to in the NOA report, is that to identify the MITL solution and the reference to unfunded enablers in the report.
'Exquisite irrelevence' is not a quote from the NAO report, but from the CEPP SRO who often uses this term to remind us of the risk we face in procuring equipment that whilst technologicaly cutting edge, does not meet the capability requirement.
Can I also respectfully suggest you refrain from accusing contributors to this forum of 'opinionated ignorance' when you have no insight of that partcular individual's specialisation or knowledge on the topic, whilst at the same time displaying obvious gaps in your own understanding of the issue under debate.
regrds
Autorev