As usual, Larry Johnson living in clown world, trying to describe ships capable of carrying over a hundred missiles instead of a handful as some kind of disadvantage. The beauty of the Arleigh Burke and Ticonderoga class VLS systems is that you carry far more missiles than any previous class of ship. The Spruance class Destroyers the Arleigh Burkes replaced had just an 8 cell Sea Sparrow launcher. The Cruisers the Tico replaced had either 1 or 2 twin terrier launchers. VLS was the answer to the Soviet strategy of "saturation doctrine", where they thought they could launch 6 to 10 ASCMs at a US ship at the same time, overwhelming defenses. In no way is a 122 (!) cell VLS system a disadvantage. Not only that, but these ships can pull into Djibouti, Amman, Dubai, Rota or any secure friendly port to reload and be back on scene quickly. And no, the CVN would not have to leave, as there the Navy just rotates ships into the CVN defense/Plane Watch duties when the current ship has other tasking.
Essentially, all modern navies have gone to VLS, and with the size of long range air defense missiles, no one is reloading them at sea. We do still reload our smaller non-VLS systems underway.
Except the points made in the article were made by this guy:
Stephen Bryen
Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Policy and the Yorktown Institute
Now, perhaps, you can tell us why you know more than Mr. Bryen.
Johnson been absolutely spot-on on the failed proxy war in Ukraine, which has been total failure.