I am by no means an expert but I read a, self proclaimed, expert saying that an F-35C purchase should be considered, even at this late stage and that the second UK carrier should be equipped with the same catapults as the French carrier. The Queen Elizabeth can fly Harriers at first, as planne and be refiited, as designed earlier than planned.How do people view the reasoning behind the UK selecting the F-35B variant of the Lightning II? Do people see that this selection is because like the USMC the RN has a unique history of STOVL? Or are there people with the view that a STOVL configuration carrier has been selected as this is the cheapest design and support option compared to the likes of STOBAR / CTOL? Do many consider this to be a justified approach considering the F35B has the shortest range and lowest payload due to the different engine?
For commonality, the RAF could fly F-35C's.
The advantages of this were, the F-35C has better range, payload and can return with more expensive unused weapons. The catapults would allow better AEW, tanker and COD. The disadvantage was the F-35B can use shorter runways with the RAF.
The current carrier design though, is more than capable for the vast majority of designed missions but if Cold War 2 were to start they would not be Champions League.
Methinks that, like theType 45's, they are not the best we could build but the best we can afford to build.
Last edited by a moderator: