Looks small for a carrier that holds...
“75-plus aircraft ready to be launched at any given time”.
must be small a/c
“Looks small for a carrier that holds...”
Were you pinching it between your fingers? It’s actually plenty big and offers a variety of platforms for local management off the coast of troublespots that could not easily be brought forth quickly and with such numbers.
This is a pretty good article:
The Case For Carriers
All in all, Polmar’s argument that amphibious assault ships should replace supercarriers in the United States Navy is contentious. His contentions that amphibs are a better option for various peacetime missions and that one Ford carrier can get you four America LHAs do not hold water. In the same article, Polmar also posed the question: “Ask a [theater] combatant commander where he’d rather have one big carrier or four [LHA/LHDs]…?” His own implied answer is the latter. While it may seem overkill to send a supercarrier to handle adversaries like a bunch of ragtag irregulars, the reality on the ground is that the senior commander is likely to opt for the carrier over three or four amphibians, because of the flat-top’s overall superior capabilities.
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/12/the-case-for-carriers-rebutting-norman-polmar/