Woolwell Of course you are correct, I missed that one, but my friend Google has refreshed my memory. Your link was interesting and helpful and led me to another link - "The Flycatchers Revival".

The continuing debate about carriers never seems to mention the support and defence ships that are required. I note that the projected CVA01 had its own dedicated ships for defence, they were cancelled as well.

I had some input with the last two crew changes for the old Ark Royal. Now that WAS a Carrier.

Woolwell You are biased! And why not?

An RAF Nav I know did a tour with the FAA on Night Fighter Hornets. The commission was in the Med and no aircaft were lost, cannot remember the Carrier.

morddwyd

"we can express an opinion, I hope."

Absolutely, I didn't say otherwise. My response was to your statement - rather than opinion - that went as follows:

"Because the cretins that made the decision did not know that the carriers, as ordered, and as johndrew has said. had no catapults or arrestor gear to operate conventional aeroplanes."

I respect your right to an opinion on this (any any other) subject, and the fact that you may well know more about it than I do. Lively and thought-provoking debate is what flows from a variety of opinions. I baulked at that word, that's all.