Sorry - there wasn't enough material of interest in hte issue to justify the cover price here in Canada so I didn't bring it home.Now thats just teasing Mag, any chance of a scan
So do we all, but I would not assume from this statement that a decision has been taken in this regard; seems like some inaccurate reporting to me. What is clear is that the RN is going to proceed with CATOBAR for the second ship, and the Admiral's visit to the STENNIS and the embedded FAA pilot are two pieces of a plan to begin regeneration of that capability. What is not yet clear is whether or not the first ship will be refitted for CATOBAR operations. What is becoming clear is that there has been a shift on the part of government toward retention of the first ship, and if possible, conversion to CATOBAR at some point in the future.I really, really, really hope this is true.
One thing I forgot to mention which I saw in the article was a reference to efforts by the RAF to downplay the contribution of FNS CHARLES DE GAULLE and her air wing in the Libya campaign, and to promote the success of the RAF's land-based air operations. That would seem to have been negated by the excellent reviews of the French carrier's performance (high 90s % availability of Rafales on board) and the Commons Defence Committee report cited in this thread a few pages back which highlighted the very high cost of the land-based air operations, the success of HMS OCEAN with her Apaches, and the notable absence of HMS ARK ROYAL.Magnificient, On RAF infiltration into the operation of the new Carriers the lessons learned before the Second World Wae were, sadly, too late and we entered into that conflict with superb carriers ( Ark Royal, Illustious etc. ) but flying the Swordfish !! The RAF had the Hurricane and the Spitfire. Many Posts ago I drew attention to the 'Inskip Award' which was the result of a belatted realisation by the then Government that the RAF were ( obviously ) concerned primarily with their service and the needs of the naval air arm were secondary.