Author Topic: Sides Matters: Why the U.S. Navy Prefer Super Aircraft Carriers (Read 162 times)

rangerrebew · « **on:** December 29, 2021, 12:52:05 pm »

December 27, 2021

Sides Matters: Why the U.S. Navy Prefer Super Aircraft Carriers

Here's a hint: think cost-effectiveness.
by Kyle Mizokami

Here's What You Need To Remember: The drift towards large carriers was a mixture of politics and practicality.

The United States Navy’s ten nuclear supercarriers are the largest warships on the high seas. Home to more than five thousand sailors and Marines, the Nimitz-class carriers are nuclear-powered and can carry nearly ninety combat aircraft. Still, it didn’t have to be this way: had the Navy taken a different tack several decades ago, the gigantic ships would have been supplemented with smaller, more cost effective flattops—the Medium Aircraft Carriers.

During World War II, the U.S. Navy operated two types of carriers: larger fleet carriers and escort carriers. The larger carriers comprised the main offensive striking power of the fleet, carrying a mixture of fighters, dive bombers, and torpedo bombers. The escort or “jeep” carriers were an economy of force measure, smaller ships with smaller air wings designed to provide air support to convoys and fill in for fleet carriers when the bigger ships were operating elsewhere.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/sides-matters-why-us-navy-prefer-super-aircraft-carriers-198537

Smokin Joe · « **Reply #1 on:** December 29, 2021, 02:16:30 pm »

I guess the question is how small could a 'jeep'carrier be in modern warfare?

Consider that the F-35B is STOL, carries a far more accurate bomb load half of that of a B-17 internally, retains air-to-air capability with that load, and does so in stealth mode, and can haul standoff cruise missiles for anti-ship and surface attacks, the potential is there with just a few planes to do what much larger wings did in WWII, only using stealth and guidance tech only dreamed of then.

Some sort of CAP would be needed for defense, upping the number of aircraft necessary, as well as rotary wing aircraft for ejected pilot recovery and ASW functions. Drones could be a force multiplier, but they, too would have to be STOL to function with a reduced sized vessel.

Could this package be stuffed into/onto a 400 ft. hull or a little larger?

That's one for the Naval architects, but smaller, yet still highly capable carriers/air wings might be key to bringing elements of a dispersed force into contact with larger enemy forces, yet being more difficult to attack by virtue of their dispersal without the enemy tipping their hand as to their presence and location.