Back to “JEEP” carriers.
I would think that submarines that can launch sophisticated and armed drones (in addition to missiles) could fulfill some functions of a carrier.
Obviously the new Ford class will never be put in harms way. It’s too valuable.
Obviously the new Ford class will never be put in harms way. It’s too valuable.
“Large” serves the purpose of intimidation. Hidden power can be more dangerous to wield since someone is more likely to call your bluff.
Example of yet another “study” whose options all reinforce the predetermined decision.
How about a cruise drone?
fewer ships
less capable ships
Hey China, you’re welcome. Let us know what else we can do to neuter ourselves on your behalf.
The planners are fighting two wars ago.
With the advent of hypersonic Surface to surface or air launched to surfact missiles we present some pretty large targets.
We should be focused on smaller, more nimble craft that can project power through the use of drones. This way the craft need less space and they can be controlled with personnel on other ships or the other part of the world.
The days of Midway and Leyte gulf are behind us.
The first thing to do is to scotch the flipping Rand Corporation.
I was just thinking about that the other day reading about the Gerald Ford Class and how hard the deployments are on the carrier battle groups.
We have no "in-between" carriers that we can just stick somewhere that doesn't require or risk a 100,000 Ultra Ship.
We need say four or five very modestly sized ships, very modestly crewed and a modest expense.
It would help so much with the rotation on the ships as well as the crew.
I see that the CVX is only capable of launching One Aircraft at a time.The problem comes when you have planes low on fuel and needing fuel.How will they have sufficient refueling aircraft in the air or at ready five.
This CVX 8 sounds like a disaster in the making.
With the prospect of China’s naval expansion and possible remote island hopping conflicts.
Is there a future for Anphib/sea plane tenders ? Close support fighters and sea plane cargo/troop carrying transports ?
land-based drones will be the future of everything, and the key will be survivability, and securing internet and command-and-control operational links after something like an EMP.
How about another alternative:
Top deck: Recover aircraft ONLY.
Next Deck (Current Hanger Deck): Launch aircraft ONLY - through aperture in bow, or off-angle.
Next Deck: Hanger Deck.
result: ship is shorter, and one deck taller.
The CVN-LX looks promising.
Not this light carrier stuff again...
Carriers are there to launch and recover aircraft, enough to matter and often enough to get the job done. To do this requires:
- a flight deck w/cats & arresting gear... large footprint
- ordinance for planes ...volume and tonnage
- fuel for planes ...volume and tonnage
- storage for planes ... volume
- parts and repairs for planes ... volume
- propulsion to operate aircraft and get where needed
fossil fueled: cheaper, but fuel bunkers and air shafts(both ways) eat volume and effect arrangement.
nuclear: expensive, but opens more volume for purposes above, and does not interfere with other arrangements.
Obviously a simplified argument, and EMALS seems to still be evolving issue, but the best modern carrier is a big nuclear volume box that carries all that is needed to perform the spectrum of missions that may be assigned.
