I would be astonished if its not Vigilance as staying with Cerberus would mean supporting an additional radar type and one that represents 1990s technology, as the contract was placed in 97. Vigilance, as I understand it, is two F35 radars mounted on either beam. A kind of baby helicopter Nimrod AEW 3.

The conversion cost was quoted by Hammond in the house per ship. Upper teens to 2 billion for POW (in build) and in the order of 2.5 billion for QE (post build reconstruction). If he had folded in costs for Hawkeye and buddy podding the C variant then he would have been guilty of some slight of hand, as the impression was definitely that these were ‘ship work’ costs. Of course politicians have form on quoting numbers disingenuously to justify decisions that they make, so sadly we just don’t know what the truth is. Having said that there were press articles, around that time, that talked of how, as the detail work was done, the impact on the ships rose and rose till hundreds of compartments required re-working, resulting in spiralling costs.

Frankly the whole programme seems a real mess of the UK’s own making. The future of UK’s maritime fixed wing is now entirely beyond our control and we just have to wait and see where the budget cuts fall in the US DOD.

To put the cost of the so called adaption into context, six years ago the French Government were quoted 3 billion Euro (2 billion pounds then) as a full proposal for a PA2 varient of CVF complete with steam cats. This was for a single build in a French yard, not superblocks, but even with some inflation it suggests that building CVFs 3 and 4 to a modified design is in the same ball park (2.5 billion pounds) as rebuilding CVFs 1 and 2 to CATOBAR. Its why I find the use of the word ‘adaptable’ as rather odd in the context.

For what it is worth I read on the internet (so take it with a huge pinch of salt) that the UK government did not get the EMALS specs from the US so the designers based the weight and space margins on the old BS6 design of cats for CVA 01. This, if true, could explain why an EMALS upgrade would require a massive scale of dismantling, redesign and rebuilding.

Sadly if the Secretary of State is to be believed then the design is utterly unsuited to EMALS conversion. The cost of conversion being broadly equivalent to a new build. Had the economics been otherwise then that is what the UK planned to do. I can’t see the Australian government laying out that kind of funding, and how much does the RAAF want to serve at sea?

If India is moving to CATOBAR via STOBAR I can’t see any interest in a carrier that has been outed as un-upgradable to cats for less than the cost of a new ship by the UK Defence Secretary.

Isn’t the x47 a USN carrier UCAV? That is requiring EMALS and AAG to operate. Or did you mean as an RAF land asset only?

Correct me if I am wrong but I don’t think the Osprey has a pressurised cabin. So no better than a helicopter for AEW unless the UK were to develop a bespoke UK variant, at huge cost.

Oh and if the people running the programme were decisive and competent types we would not be in half the current mess.

Choose the B and you are betting the whole programme’s success on that one aircraft making it into service with acceptable capability and at an affordable cost. Given that its just come off probation that seems like a huge gamble. Who knows what bumps lie in the road ahead. The loss of the C leaves you with at least two clearly capable alternatives.

The numbers seem to be crazy made up figures too. Two billion to install the deck gear in POW! The shipset seems to cost around 500m that means 1.5 billion to install them. The cost of 1.5 Astutes! I suspect they have taken costs of both ships, POW in build and QE in the 2020s including a first of class refit. Probably added in 20 years of training cost from now to then too. So a price over c20 years presented as if it needs to be paid now. Would be a typical political trick.

The whole thing reeks of short termism, what is easiest this parliament, the future being some other poor mugs problem.