^ It is unclear how many JSF F-35B's (selected for JCA) this number is associated with, although 40 or 42 F-35B's were being mentioned in other sources at the time.  The UK requires that its F-35B's are able to sustain 2 sorties per day, and surge to 3.
* Standard airgroup aircraft only, i.e.  JCA, EH-101 Merlin and MASC.

The 60,000+ tonnes full load design selected in January 2003 was expected to meet all these requirements in full, the slightly smaller design that is now likely to be built may not be able to meet all of them in full, for example it will not be possible to maintain simultaneous fixed wing launch and recovery off the smaller deck.  However MOD officials have rejected potential savings such as dropping the "adaptability" feature and opting to accommodate either conventional or vertical take-off and landing planes but not both, and reduce the number of possible 'sorties' per hour that the ships are capable of deploying. 

During the second half of 2003 the aggregate sorties requirement was revised downwards to a new goal of 420 sorties over 5 days, with a threshold of 360 sorties - reflecting the reduction in CVF operating capacity to 36 (or less) JCA's that was being considered at the time.  In January 2004, Admiral Sir Alan West, First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff publicly emphasised that he considered it to be essential that each carrier was able to carry 36 of the new joint strike fighters, and for each of those fighters to be capable of completing three sorties every day [surge] - which equates to 108 sorties per 24 hours assuming that all aircraft are serviceable.  And in April 2004 Admiral Sir Alan West again stated that "The plan is ... 36 JCAs and ... four MASCs, ... that is the basic airwing that we are basing it [CVF] around".  It thus appears that the RN has insisted on a return to the original requirements for JCA operations of 110 sorties per 24 hours, 510 in 5 days.  However the overall maximum CVF airgroup size was reduced to 40 (including 36 JSF's) rather than the 50 (including 40 JSF's) of the original Staff Target. 

In January 2005, Captain Chris Palmer, Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff Aviation, said that CVF would have an an air group including up to 36 JCA's, and other aircraft to be deployed on CVF included 4 MASC and 6 Merlin HM1 helicopters, i.e. an implied 46 aircraft capacity.  He also said that planned [JCA] utilisation rates are expected to allow each aircraft to fly twice a day, giving each CVF a maximum sorties generation of up to 360 flights over a 5-day period, with a surge [3 sorties/plane for one day] taking this as high as 396. 

In March 2005, the latest figures for JCA sortie generation from CVF were set at 108 launches in the first 24 hours, reducing to 72 per day for ten days and 36 for a further 20 days.  A standard strike tailored air group was defined as including 30 JCAs (with up to 36 for short periods), with up to six anti-submarine Merlins and four maritime air surveillance and control (ASaC) aircraft.

Central to the prime objective of achieving maximum sustained sortie levels is the issue of aircraft handling and movement.  The complex process of aircraft handling, movement, preparation, launch and recovery has been the subject of extensive analysis and modelling, bearing in mind that CVF should be able to simultaneously launch and recover aircraft, concurrent with fixed- and rotary-wing operations.  In turn, these analyses of aircraft cycling have influenced flight deck operating and parking areas, island footprint, hangar layout, aircraft and weapon lifts, and site of support services.  BAE Systems and Thales have both developed sortie-generation models respectively known as SURGE and SAILOR. Additionally the DPA has its own model known as CAPSTAN, later CAPSTAN2.

(Above) An indication of just how complex the CVF modelling is.

A Flight Deck Management System (FDMS) will optimally and efficiently assign flight deck park spots, assign work assignments, add required aircraft movement to the movement order task list, etc. 

Both fixed and rotary wing aircraft will have to be maintained, fuelled and armed then moved into optimum position before launching. A "pit-stop'' approach to servicing is now considered to be the most efficient way to minor maintenance, refuelling and re-arming - with stations known as Arming and Refuelling Points (ARP) on the flight deck itself in a bid to reduce aircraft turnaround time.  Thales' aviation systems team leader Gene Tucker, a former USN carrier aviator, explains: "What we envisage is one-stop servicing stations on the edge of the flight deck to minimise aircraft turnaround time and cut the number of personnel on deck. These service stations will prove for refuelling, re-arming, quick maintenance, and an interface into the ship's IT infrastructure."   In an early concept CVF's concepts, weapons handling, which is normally one of the most manpower intensive activities on board an aircraft aircraft, was almost completely automated.  By early 2003 the MOD was describing a vision for CVF in which weapon requirements were passed by the Aircraft Support Chain Management Information System (ASCMIS) to the magazine where the automated handling system selected the stores, initiated the weapons' built in test routines, and placed the items on the weapon lift.  The automation was facilitated by the use of standard weapon packaging and weapon handling is further simplified by the introduction of Insensitive Munitions (IM) and All Up Rounds, which allow the stowage of ready-use ammunition close to the point of delivery.  This vision of a fully automated handling system was dropped from the design in summer 2003 as part of a cost cutting exercise.  A less sophisticated but much cheaper to develop highly automated (i.e. semi-autonomous, partially manual) weapons handling systems, elevators and magazine equipment will now be used instead.

In December 2005 it was announced that ALSTEC had been identified as the preferred partner for this Highly Mechanised Weapon Handling System (HMWHS) for CVF.  The company has now begun high level system design work that will allow for operational flows in accordance with both Sortie Generation Profile and Replenishment Requirements, with detailed simulation of pallet/weapon movements around the weapons handling system in order to verify processes and design.  Other work includes the weapons handling system design, weapon lifts design and the operational integration of all systems using an integrated control system that interfaces with the ship’s Platform Management System.   Marinise’d commercially off-the-shelf equipment will be used where possible and appropriate.

The design of the flight deck and hangar takes many factors into account - allowing for parking areas, support services, lifts (for both aircraft and stores) as well as acoustic, heat and noise footprints.

In order to maximise flight deck area, Thales and BMT opted for a radical innovative design using two separate islands, this minimises the island footprint on the deck while providing enhanced operational survivability by physical separation of key ship and flight control functions, and furthermore according to Peter Robertson, "positioning the flying control centre on the aft island improves operational control and flight-deck safety." He adds that wind-tunnel testing and CFD analyses of the twin-island configuration has dispelled concerns over airflow anomalies.  The second island allows the ship to have a flight-control centre that principally looks aft, rather than forward, as the most critical 'evolution' is when the aircraft are landing. The two smaller islands also give much more 'parking space' for aircraft on deck. A further innovation will be the use of deck-edge lifts. Most carriers have lifts within the deck itself, sometimes in the runway, which can cause problems if the lifts get stuck.

The Thales design features two huge (approx 20 x 30 metres) starboard deck edge lifts of 70-tonnes (154,000 lbs) capacity, each is able to accommodate two JCA-size aircraft or heavy lift helicopters.  By comparison, the lifts on the Invincible-class carriers are just 16.75m x 9.75m (55ft x 32 ft), with a mere 18.1 tonnes (40,000 lbs) maximum capacity.

Unlike the Invincible class, CVF will be fitted with a Jet Blast Deflectors (JBD).  This is necessary because of the very high and potentially dangerous and destructive thrust that the F-135 engine in the JSF generates when running at maximum thrust for launch.  It is hoped that with modern materials it will be possible to avoid the cost and complexity of having to use sea water to cool these - the expected use or otherwise of afterburners during launch will be a big factor in this decision.

The Thales/BMT CVF STOVL design selected in January 2003 had two side-by-side JBD positions with "hold-back" restraints about 150 metres back from the ski-jump style bow.  This allowed pairs of aircraft to be launched in quick succession.  The take-off run was considered sufficient for F-35B's to be launched at maximum take-off weight (MTOW) given reasonable (30kts) actual wind over deck (WOD), while the configuration also allows for very rapid launch events.  But in addition the extended centre-line flight deck configuration allowed for occasional very long (over 200m) take-off runs from an unrestrained starting point right aft (like Harrier's on the current Invincible's) for heavily loaded aircraft in low WOD conditions. Some changes in this configuration may occur with the reduction in platform size.

Work was also carried out to map the heat and acoustic footprints on deck.  Noise is a major issue for the CVF design as health and safety considerations restrict the allowable tolerance to high levels of acoustic energy.  The Jan 2003 design featured two vertical landing pad for F-35B's. 

Fish says that CVF and JSF offer the chance to improve STOVL operation significantly over today's Sea Harrier FA.2/Harrier GR.7A.  Options for the vertical landing element include approaching over the ships stern rather than coming alongside and manoeuvring over the landing spot.  This offers an improved landing rate and addresses environmental issues - such as the jet exhaust down blast associated with landing on.  The F-35's improved STOVL handling and control will be a factor in allowing this, while the aircrafts electro-optical sensors offer opportunities to present the pilot with improved cueing.

During cost reduction efforts in the second half of 2003, the flight deck arrangements for CVF were considerable simplified, this was partially imposed by the reduced size of the ship.  In the Bravo and later Delta designs, the side-by-side launch positions with convergent runs to a large bow ski jump were dropped, and only a single JBD is now fitted on the axial runway, beside the aft island.  The bow area was now split, with the ski jump ski jump limited to the port side, this has the significant benefit of allowing additional [although rather exposed] deck parking to starboard.  The special landing pads for F-35B VL's also seem to have been dropped.  The flight deck has been narrowed aft, making the provision for an angle landing lane very obvious.  The Delta flight deck area is about 4 acres (nearly three times that of an Invincible-class).

Reports emerged in Q1 2005 indicated that the design team was considering the feasibility of adopting the shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) technique.  This offered some advantages, particularly in hot weather conditions, but issues such as bolters and fuel reserves also had to be addressed and the final decision was apparently negative.

Two overlapping photos of the flight deck of a model of Delta CVF at Euronaval in October 2004.  The single take-off run and new deck park area to starboard of the ski-jump are obvious. The November 2002 'adaptable' Alpha CVF design was fitted with a very large hanger deck - the hanger length was about 180m and width 36m, giving a useable area of about 6480 sq metres - roughly three times that of the current Invincible Class carriers and apparently enough to accommodate up to 24 F-35B's plus 6 EH-101 Merlin size helicopters, or any equivalent mix.  It was stated before the January 2003 down-select that the clear height of the hanger would be 7-10m, the higher figure being assumed to apply only to a small maintenance bay area, but Thales later claimed that the entire hanger deck of their design was high enough (10m?) to ensure that any aircraft embarked could be maintained anywhere, eliminating the need to move airframes around during maintenance.  10m would have given the CVF's the highest hangers ever fitted to any aircraft carrier. The optimised (Q3 2003) Beta CVF design had a smaller hanger, sized for up to 20 aircraft and helicopters, and also the clearance height was reduced by several metres over much of the length.   In the latest Delta designs (end-2003 onwards), the hangar is 163 metres long and 29 metres wide - the total hanger area is 4,700 sq m.  Hanger height is stated as being 7.1 metres, increasing in the 'hard hat' area to over 9 metres, with a crane hook clearance of 7.5 metres. The design allows for accommodating at least 20 JSF's (the F-35B is the worst case due to its non-folding wings), or up to 45 Sea King size helicopters, in three “bays” separated by fire curtains. There are large aviation support spaces fore and aft of the hangar, and along its port side.  Two rows of compartments will surround the hangar, for ease of access and as extra protection, and modular (containerised) storage space will have the capacity of 24 London buses. The philosophy for determining the height of the hangar was that the hangar would be high enough to park and maintain JCA over its entire area. The hangar should also be high enough to stow all other JFAG aircraft, though limiting those operations that require considerable overhead height to “high hat” areas where there is a 9.5m clearance.  Secondary role aircraft (such as Apache AH) were not allowed to unduly drive hangar design.  This gives a hangar 6.5m high from deck to deck head with a minimum clear height of 6.1m (note that seems to be some contradiction in numbers) allowing for structure and fittings such as lighting, and is high enough to accommodate all JFAG modularised stowage boxes.   The hangar extends over two decks with a gallery deck between the hangar and flight deck in both variants.  The high hat areas extend into the gallery deck. Flight deck area is about 15,700 sq m (nearly 4 acres),  flight deck length overall is 277 metres, STOVL flight deck breadth is 69 metres (excluding catwalks, minor sponsons, but including lifts), 6 operating spots, maximum available STO runway length is 274m. In July 2007, DE&S stated "The flight deck area is nearly 13,000 square metres " - much less than previously thought if accurate (probably not).

Other aviation related items that will be fitted to CVF include: suitable communication systems; the Joint Tactical Information and Distribution System (JTIDS) supporting NATO Link 16; other data links (NATO 10, 11 & 14); a precision carrier  approach radar; a tactical air navigation system (TACAN); all-weather approach system landing aids (CTL), possibly a new semi-automatic carrier controlled landing system; electro-luminescent panels for deck orientation; a deck lighting system compatible with night vision goggles; an operating limits instrumentation system (OLIS); a deck approach projector site (DAPS), a stabilised glide slope indicator (SGSI); and a Horizon Approach Path Indicator (HAPI) system.  

The CVF design will also introduce a mass of new or improved systems to the Royal Navy, including the Aircraft Support Chain Management Information System (ASCMIS), an aircraft Prognostics & Health Management (PHM) system, a new Low Observability (LO) Diagnostic System, an improved Flight Deck Management System (FDMS), new type undercarriage restraining devices and electromagnetic deck locks, and possibly even robot handlers that can be tasked by the FDMS to move aircraft on the flight deck.  These systems and equipment cumulatively all represent a very substantial investment in both money and crew personnel.

(Above) An interesting graphic showing superimposed STOVL and CTOL flight deck arrangements.   (Source: MOD)

In the event that the STOVL F-35B variant of the JSF is cancelled by the Americans, a contingency plan has been developed to complete HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2014 in a STOVL configuration to operate Harrier's.  HMS Prince of Wales would then be completed two years later in a CTOL configuration with catapults and arresting gear, probably to operated the F035C variant.   HMS Queen Elizabeth would also be converted to a CTOL configuration at the end of the decade, after the Harrier had left service.

In July 2007 it was officially stated that the flight deck area for the UK CVF variant was "nearly 13,000 sq m" (slightly less than previous statements had indicated), and the hanger volume was 29,000 cubic meters.