The Sea King is limited to about 10,000 feet which limits range.  It's limited in the ability to do airborne air control and it's ESM is very limited.  The E-2C can track 600 targets and control 40 air intercepts.  There have been constant requests by RN for information on the E-2 the past few years as a replacement for Asac7.

As an aside the Indian Navy at one point was interested in operating the E-2 STOBAR and requested information from Grumman.  Grumman informed them, eventually, that some capability (weight) would have to be dropped.  Reportedly the Indian Navy thought the risk of engine failure at take-off was not worth the risk operating with a ski jump as such a failure would result in the loss of the aircraft.

Lastly just to show how old the Asac7 airframes are in 2003 (iirc) 2 collided at night during operations.  These were the original two test airframes from 1982.  Plans are for them to soldier on until at least 2022.  At one point the RN wanted to at least put the mission equipment in new birds- EH-101 but this was seen as far too costly; however, this was when the new AEW was seen as coming on in the 2015 time frame.  It's not clear how well the Sea Kings will hold up for another 20+ years.

The Neut published gibberish and hoped that by proclaiming "jointness" and  other buzzwords he could skate through.

Well in simply English..........

The Sentry is a landbased AEWAC bird that has an maximum average useful flyout from base of about three to five hours its best cruising velocity. For those of you who like it in kilometers, that is about 3000 kilometers maximum useful sortie radius, on bring-back with tanker support to maintain station. To keep that bird race-tracking as a flying radar you need to refuel her at least once every five hours to safely top her off. Radar depending on the service altitude will cover a radius footprint of 450-600 kilometers. Now that patrol racetrack can be point racetrack or oval, but it will be pinned to a certain locations.that depend on LONG land-based hard all weather runways. never mind the fighter support that limits its actual EFFECTIVE radius. Most escort  fighters of the type useful to bodyguard an AWACS has an effective fly-back reach of one to two hours radius from a land-base.usually the same base or a base near to the one supporting the Sentry. those fighters like the Sentry need land-based tanker support

Now a carrier or base-ship has to pin itself under that coverage?  I don't think so. Not for a navy  that has to operate  beyond two hours fly-out from land-like maybe the Falklands. Otherwise the British would have used Nimrod coverage out of Ascension, during the Falklands war.

For Interested Amateur-very very simplified.

1. The Aster has never AFAIK been tested in real world combat multi-axis  combat conditions as a SAM  The typical ASTER test has been against an  Exoce  target drone stand-in and never more than TWO at a time. This is okay if you are trying to splash a singleton or two, but the system has NEVER fired off against three or more drones in a range shot for a very good reason.

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/raymondhall64/CVFneutwrong2.jpg?t=1213721967">http://s289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/raymondhall64/?action=view&current=CVFneutwrong2.jpg">http://s289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/raymondhall64/?action=view&current=CVFneutwrong2.jpg">http://s289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/raymondhall64/?action=view&current=CVFneutwrong2.jpg">
 The reason is TIME. You hear so much about quarter second launch or less intervals from the Sylver, but they never tell you about.
a. The full two seconds it takes for the rocket to flop over and POINT at its intended drop basket.
b. The 7000 meter effective range that its active radar seeker will see an Exocet or Klub sized AShM against see clutter as it looks down as it PLUNGES to it intercept point. if it misses the intercept merge by as little as two seconds earlky or late it MISSES completely.
c. The fact that the radio-opaque ASTER rocket body; if it turns more than three quarter aspect out of the telemetry update guidance signal will drop the telemetry and the update will be lost to signal dropout because the antenna is wrongly positioned and designed. Those RCS [PIFPAF] rockets on the ASTER are where the antenna has to be to give you that PIFPAF  nonsense.This shouldn't matter; if you get at least one update to point the rocket at the changing drop-basket insertion point
Lets do some math?

Mach 4 rocket moves at 1080 meters per second.
Exocet stand-in moves at 250 meters per second.
       Combined closure is much more than 1100+ meters per second depending on the facing aspects and vector angles.
Now take that  FoV active radar hemisphere that is in front of the ASTER which is MER 7000 meters in radius . You have a crossing slice [tangent plane] roughly 1/3 of that when the ASTER sees the inbound. 2,333 meters gives you TWO seconds to acquire and maneuver to get within 10 meters, or less for that pitiful small warhead to proximity burst and splash the inbound. If you.MISS by 1/10 of a second you miss by 360 meters.You nhave TWO seconds to get it right. You don't get to arrive early or late.  PIFPAF is a desperate MBDA realization that you have to jink to get close to hit to kill or at least get close so that air-to-air missile derivative can proximity kill an object. The actual pick-out from clutter of an ASTER against wave action of an object three times its apparent size at 7000 meters depends on a battery powered radar that is built off the crap MICA missile. That radar  is less than 6 inches across  as a receiver. its FoV is not hemispheric. 7000 meters depth FoV is optimistic.
      That is the math and the physics.
      Now let's talk about the rocket
      MICA-Source MBD

You just cannot post.a complete explanation in one chunk.

Well any way the short version.

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/raymondhall64/Airwarfare_EW.jpg?t=1213726593"> 

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/raymondhall64/CVFneutwrong1.jpg?t=1213731103">

Herald

Short lesson on  ASTER.

1. You have to meet your merge with less than 1/30th of a second with Aster to obtain a proximity kill against a Mach 1 target.
2. Against a Mach 2 target that is about 1/50th of a second.
3. Why? 1100+meters per second closing  velocities in condition 1, 1600+ metewrs per second in condition 2.  Condition 1 miss is 30+meters. Condition 2 miss is 30+meters.
4. the secant of the Aster seeker FoV conic is about 2500 meters.  How long  is the inbound in the field of view at Mach 1 before HTK ?  1/2 secant is 1250 meters/'250 meters per second or 5 seconds to get there. This means you have to see it at least 5400 meters away for ASTER to jnk to meet it at Mach 4. The MICA derived seeker can only see 7000 meters. discriminate and pick out a drone against wave clutter: so that gives you what; a second early or late to arrive at the drop basket before the seeker snaps on to look or you miss? Mach 2+ in bound? Forget it. IT WILL NEVER SEE IT IN TIME TO JINK TO MEET.   
 
Then there is the signal dropout caused by the fact that the antenna cannot receive the radio signal from the telemetry that the fire control transmits to update the rocket and the clock mismatch between the guidance control unit  and the fire control system.

Then the ASTER rocket cannot use AEGIS or US AWACs radar guidance. Yeah SARH is old tech but it works. STANDARD and ESSM don't lose guidance or telemetry update when they arc over the surface ship LOS radio/radar horizon-because there is a big eye in the sky [Hawkeye] painting the inbounds and updating. The ASTER isn't much use beyond 30,000 meters in either version. Why do you think the Daring's radar array is mounted so high? They called it HORIZON for a reason.

Herald

Herald, a few points, if I may.