Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FreedomProtector
There have been several studies doen on smaller Sea Control Carriers (which many smaller countries are adopting), and on a concept called the Corsair, which would be a very small carrier employing maybe half a dozen F-35Bs.

After all was said and done, given the mission profile required, the US Navy and our planners have (in my estimation rightly so) decided to go forward with the large deck nuclear carriers for the forseeable future...at least 50+ years. These carriers will continue to get provide more and more capability, be more and more efficient, be less manpower intensive, be more stealthy, and be more modern/furutristic as time goes on.

251 posted on 10/04/2006 7:44:05 AM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies ]


To: Jeff Head
"These carriers will continue to get provide more and more capability, be more and more efficient, be less manpower intensive, be more stealthy, and be more modern/futuristic as time goes on."

One big carrier will be always more efficient in terms of man-power, logistics, spare parts inventories, ammunition storage, one nuclear reactor instead of several etc. and will improve over time w/ engineering, hard work and $$ etc....

I think the question asked is one of risk assessment/vulnerability. How vulnerable is an aircraft carrier, a very large value target, in a real (country with somewhat advanced anti-ship missiles) war? Would we be less vulnerable with several smaller stealthy carriers? At what cost? (several smaller would cost more to operate etc.) How much harder is it for the enemy to find multiple little carriers then one big carrier? If the enemy hit one little carrier, is it a survivable loss? If the enemy hit a big carrier, or two, is that a survivable loss? etc....

The modern aircraft carrier is amazing, and I agree we should have a few more of them. As fast as the world changes, it is wise to look for potential weaknesses, examine vulnerability and not become complacent. Smaller stealthy carriers with a couple of several VTOL planes seem more costly per amount of capability but reduce vulnerability. I hope that the planners have made the best/right assessment.
259 posted on 10/04/2006 9:56:10 AM PDT by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson