I was worried about this if the carrier got too big.
Like the Battleships before them
What a pointless article.
I noticed this guy never gave an alternative method of putting a LOT of military power somewhere in a hurry. Not to mention the occasional humanitarian missions.
It would be a difficult proposition to take out a carrier and will continue to be so for some time.
I don’t know what replaces the carrier. The carrier is U. S. soil projected around the world. At any given time we can move the resources to hot spots and put them down.
Without them, we simply do not project in any meaningful manner.
It would seem there could be a way to defeat the new class of killer anti-ship missiles.
That’s what I would be working on feverishly.
That carrier would not be alone. Not just the ship based planes but Air Force attacking plus missiles firing from all the other surface ships. Sub killers looking to kill other subs.
If we had a competent man as president he would let loose the military telling them to get back to him when the enemy is dead.
The only reason the enemy does not fear us as much is he knows the democrats will support them over the United States. They can count on the democrats hobbling the military and getting many people killed.
There will still be pilot controlled fighter aircraft but they will become the exception rather than the rule.
When a Fighter goes down you got to rescue the pilot if you can. When a drone goes down you can blow it up remotely or scorch it with another drone and forget about it.
There are fewer and fewer countries in the world where the United States can stage a military response to the growing threats to US security worldwide.
We need more and bigger Carriers not fewer..
You don’t “disguise” a carrier per se.
You disguise a smaller and less valuable ship to look like a carrier on the enemies radar. Preferably LOTS of ships.
Perhaps the LCS has a good use afterall...
“...carriers have enormous radar cross-sections. They don’t have that sleek, angular, unearthly appearance...”
If you are the enemy and can see one of these - then you’ve just been defeated!
What ever the problems with a carrier’s vulnerability, it is better than the vulnerability of a land runway.
There is little uncertainty as to the location of a land runway. Land runways also are hard to move to a location where they can be used against today’s enemy.
So the CVN is dead but other countries are rushing full tilt to copy them as best they can. Got it.
If the enemy are getting close enough to paint your CVN with radar, you are doing it wrong.
Anything coming over the horizon should be identified and, if hostile, killed. Any missiles launched at a CVN should have do its own searching because nothing should survived to tell the launching aircraft where the carrier actually is.
Submarines, esp. the super-silent AIP subs, are the real threat and a scary one they are!
Aircraft Carriers are mobile ISLANDS... under american control..
Just having one in someones general vicinity causes a look over the shoulder..
More firepower than most countrys.. and better PR source than most media outlets..
and thats overlooking the military Porn angle..
American carriers are damn good looking sexy pieces of equipment..
The first rule of naval warfare is never use active sonar and radar for search in wartime. It is the best way to get killed. It is like screaming “here I am shoot me”. Active sonar and radar are for targeting purpose when you are ready to shoot to kill, for targeting solutions.
I say keep building these floating fortresses. They allow us to take the war to the enemy without having to build land-based airfields.