I am only advocating the idea to help her afford the 2 she has ordered, not to purchase 1 of the 2-
I mean a third ship, but built first.
Ijust cant think of another CATOBAR program ready to be implemented from a country that might sell

either way she has big troubles looking forward agreed? Britain in big financial&economic trouble. Someone of the British Government and Thales should be talking right now to the brazilians, and offering them first ship of the class- and to start production immediately.

Britain could use the jobs and cash
Could use the reduction in unit price a third unit would bring
Would encourage further purchases(FranceCATOBAR,SpainCATOBAR, ItalySTOVL, 2nd for Brazil?)
would have cheaper long term costs for spares

Only other option is to get on there knees and sign massively comprehensive treaty with the US, allow basing rights etc etc(extremely unlikely)

I can barely see brazil buying a STOVL carrier- they would need to buy a completely new type of aircraft, when the two front runners in their new fighter program are both CATOBAR capable. mpst likely they extensively refit the Ex-foch to enable it another 15 years, buy an ex US carrier(extremely unlikely), CdG(France could look to offload and reaccelerate CVF program with offsets-she is a problem child!)

Unfortunately the most likely place for Ark is the scrappers, next as a stopgap for australia- spoke to my mate again, the more they look at them the worse it gets:(

BEER IS MENT TO BE SERVED COLD!! Its ment to be refreshing!!:D

Harriers was sarcastic- just thinking about them makes me laugh!:D

Your arguements make sense in a long term opposed landing of the British Army- Not the Australian Army.

Our light infantry battalions dont need all this equipment- if it was going to be more than 5 days until reinforcement, its unviable. we carry hoochies, and enough water and rations for 7-10 days. in the solomons for example, a completment of 8 black hawks and 2-4 chinooks would be all thats needed to land a 2 company security group and a engineering squadron- what is to stop bulldozers and several containers on deck or below? where the sea dart used to be?

From wikipedia- With its triple-hook cargo system, the CH-47D can carry heavy payloads internally and up to 26,000 pounds (for example, bulldozers and 40-foot / 12 m containers) externally, at speeds over 155 mph (250 km/h).

Ark Royals original retiremnt date was 2015- so there is obviously some life in her. LHDs operational in 2014- i’m not talking living forever like Hermes does with india.

A good friend serving on one of our Anzac FFHs had a look at the old girls, i cant remember which, but its crew were effectively told it wont be going any where anytime soon, if ever again:(

I understand large quantity of war stocks of heavy weapons at mount pleasant? so even IF the runway was hit, 3 or 4 C-17s of paras could drop into MPA and reinforce?

come to think of it, was this every considered in 1982? instead of probes on vulcans, more on hercs- san carlos may not have been as bad?

all good points, but we dont need to have the sustainment worries hang us up- we aren’t going to be landing far from us in Iwo Jima style fighting-
we need a ship capable of landing the battlegroup in a area quickly, where a safe landing may not be guaranteed- think solomons, PNG, bougainville, timor leste- just so the airport can be secured for our C-17s and C-130s to roll in.
crew from Kanimblas and some moving around would cover its crew needs.
cost could be justified in experience with through deck flight operations, and ironing the kinks out in our large crew management systems while not perfect, is one of two viable options

what should we be worried about more- the threat from North Korea, or Stockbrockers…….. maybe dealing with DPRK can wait:D