Navy Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carriers Have a New ‘Unbeatable’ Foe (Not Russia)

[rangerrebew]

Navy Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carriers Have a New ‘Unbeatable’ Foe (Not Russia)
 
The United States' Nimitz-class aircraft carriers have been a central pillar of the United States Navy since they were introduced into service in the 1970s.

These supercarriers allow Washington to deploy dozens of strike aircraft virtually anywhere in the world on short notice and are a potent component of American power projection.
 
Design and Variations for Nimitz-Class
The Nimitz-class carriers were designed from the outset for long longevity, great endurance, as well as rapid deployment.

Each ship in the class is powered by two A4W nuclear reactors, allowing for virtually unlimited range, limited only by the consumption of foodstuff by the ship's crew, and requires refueling of their nuclear reactors just once during their service lives after 25 years.

Also, the essential design of the Nimitz-class carriers is fairly consistent across the class, newer ships incorporate incremental improvements to their designs.

More modern island structures, improved radar and communication equipment as well as upgraded survivability have all been steadily upgraded in later builds.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/navy-nimitz-class-aircraft-carriers-have-a-new-unbeatable-foe-not-russia/ar-AA1CLbUJ?ocid=widgetonlockscreen&cvid=ad3d8712eb5c48b885076ad77177068f&ei=94

[Timber Rattler]

I think the Ford class is just too big and too expensive.  Aircraft carriers, at least in their current form, are becoming obsolete...stealthier and fast moving submarines, frigates, destroyers, and cruisers are needed in this new drone and hypersonic missile age.  Sometime of aircraft platform is required, but I think the Navy needs to build smaller "escort" carrier types instead of the floating cities/targets that the service has always demanded.

[rangerrebew]

I think the Ford class is just too big and too expensive.   

I'm not so certain carriers are built only for wars any more.  In 1976 the carrier on which I served was in Sinapore for the 4th of July because Americans wanted a show of force present for the holiday. The Ford class is certainly more pleasing to the eyes than the old Forestal class and will be impressive in any port she goes to.  Remember, the Ford was originally built without weapons elevators, a rather important means of moving weapons and I wonder if they were so busy thinking of how it looked rather than how it functioned, the wartime needs were overlooked.

[Timber Rattler]

I wonder if they were so busy thinking of how it looked rather than how it functioned, the wartime needs were overlooked.

That would not surprise me in the least!

[MeganC]

I think the Ford class is just too big and too expensive.  Aircraft carriers, at least in their current form, are becoming obsolete...stealthier and fast moving submarines, frigates, destroyers, and cruisers are needed in this new drone and hypersonic missile age.  Sometime of aircraft platform is required, but I think the Navy needs to build smaller "escort" carrier types instead of the floating cities/targets that the service has always demanded.

I like the new Iranian carrier that was cheaply converted from an old cargo ship. If it does the job....

[rangerrebew]

I like the new Iranian carrier that was cheaply converted from an old cargo ship. If it does the job....

The very first American carriers were just that.  I would think the real problem is putting a flight deck on an old ship without a deep draft could make it top heavy and dangerous in heavy seas.

[Timber Rattler]

The very first American carriers were just that.  I would think the real problem is putting a flight deck on an old ship without a deep draft could make it top heavy and dangerous in heavy seas.

That was the problem with the Japanese carriers...they were converted cruisers and battleships, with the flight decks built on top of the superstructures.

This is Kaga...

[Smokin Joe]

I think the Ford class is just too big and too expensive.  Aircraft carriers, at least in their current form, are becoming obsolete...stealthier and fast moving submarines, frigates, destroyers, and cruisers are needed in this new drone and hypersonic missile age.  Sometime of aircraft platform is required, but I think the Navy needs to build smaller "escort" carrier types instead of the floating cities/targets that the service has always demanded.

If we look back at WWII, the 'jeep carriers' did a lot of power projection with smaller targets. OF the 151 carriers built during the war, 122 were escort carriers, providing limited air power where needed.

A modern strike aircraft provides far more firepower than the aircraft of that era, so reduced numbers of airframes on a smaller ship only factor in when considering attrition. The concept seems tailor-made for STOL variant F-35s.