Author Topic: Navy Aircraft Carriers Are Expensive and Vulnerable to Attack. Here's How to Replace Them.  (Read 373 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest

Navy Aircraft Carriers Are Expensive and Vulnerable to Attack. Here's How to Replace Them.

Could this work?
by T. X. Hammes

If we stop buying carriers after the JFK, the United States will still have seven carriers through 2050. If we shift funds to container ship carriers, we can vastly increase the numbers of platforms and weapons while cutting personnel and procurement costs drastically. And while carriers represent a fifty-year commitment and billions in decommissioning costs, container ships can be retired easily if necessary. In a time of rapid technological change, should we be making fifty-year bets?

There is an ongoing debate about the continued viability of the aircraft carrier. Proponents point to the fact the carrier provides a range of capabilities essential for power projection and sea control that, without basing rights, cannot be provided in any other way. Opponents note that several nations have drones and cruise missiles that vastly outrange the short-legged carrier air wing. They also note that China has developed a ballistic missile specifically to kill carriers. A particular concern is that a carrier and air wing alone cost $20 billion and 5,000 Americans live aboard. This is an enormous investment of eggs is a possibly fragile basket.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/navy-aircraft-carriers-are-expensive-and-vulnerable-attack-heres-how-replace-them-33681

Offline Idiot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,631
Navy Aircraft Carriers Are Expensive and Vulnerable to Attack. Here's How to Replace Them.

Could this work?
by T. X. Hammes

If we stop buying carriers after the JFK, the United States will still have seven carriers through 2050. If we shift funds to container ship carriers, we can vastly increase the numbers of platforms and weapons while cutting personnel and procurement costs drastically. And while carriers represent a fifty-year commitment and billions in decommissioning costs, container ships can be retired easily if necessary. In a time of rapid technological change, should we be making fifty-year bets?

There is an ongoing debate about the continued viability of the aircraft carrier. Proponents point to the fact the carrier provides a range of capabilities essential for power projection and sea control that, without basing rights, cannot be provided in any other way. Opponents note that several nations have drones and cruise missiles that vastly outrange the short-legged carrier air wing. They also note that China has developed a ballistic missile specifically to kill carriers. A particular concern is that a carrier and air wing alone cost $20 billion and 5,000 Americans live aboard. This is an enormous investment of eggs is a possibly fragile basket.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/navy-aircraft-carriers-are-expensive-and-vulnerable-attack-heres-how-replace-them-33681
I guess this would work...but will they still make deliveries.  happy77