Author Topic: TODAY'S US NAVY COULD LEARN A LESSON FROM THE ERA OF ESSEX-CLASS AIRCRAFT CARRIERS  (Read 73 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 184,637
TODAY'S US NAVY COULD LEARN A LESSON FROM THE ERA OF ESSEX-CLASS AIRCRAFT CARRIERS
BY JONATHAN H. KANTOR   OCT. 21, 2025 7:15 PM EST

U.S. Navy/Wikimedia Commons
When the Imperial Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, it unknowingly altered the future of the aircraft carrier. While carriers were seen as support ships up to that point, some saw the potential for more. To that end, the United States had already begun constructing new and improved carriers via the Naval Act of 1938. When Japan sank the Pacific Fleet's battleships while its three carriers were elsewhere, it accelerated the timeline, placing carriers as the lead capital ships in the Pacific.

This allowed the newly designed Essex-class carrier to shine, becoming a workhorse for the U.S. Navy throughout WWII. By the end of the war, the U.S. had constructed 24 Essex-class carriers, and not a single one was lost to enemy action. Several were severely damaged, but they always managed to return to the fight. When the war ended, construction of the Essex-class carriers was halted, and orders for more were canceled — the U.S. was looking to the future, which would eventually see the Essex-class carriers give way to the Midway-class and, eventually, supercarriers.

While modern carriers like the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) are significantly more advanced, the Essex-class carrier fleet were engineered for growth and expansion. They remained fully mission-capable for decades by adapting to technological and tactical changes. This allowed naval operations to be built around carriers, developing into Carrier Strike Groups and the lead ships of every major blue-water navy on the planet.

Read More: https://www.slashgear.com/1998687/essex-class-aircraft-carrier-history/
abolitionist Frederick Douglass: “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will.”

Online Timber Rattler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,976
  • Conservative Purist and Patriot
Yep, the Ford is way too big and complicated, The Navy needs to build smaller new carriers to serve as floating, mobile, advanced bases to serve as drone operations platforms.  I would still include a smaller, more compact air wing for missions that require manned-aircraft, but the age of drones is now upon us and there is no going back.  Ford is a huge target with lost of eggs in that single basket.
aka "nasty degenerate SOB," "worst of the worst at Free Republic," "Garbage Troll," "Neocon Warmonger," "Filthy Piece of Trash," "damn $#%$#@!," "Silly f'er," "POS," "war pig," "neocon scumbag," "insignificant little ankle nipper," "@ss-clown," "neocuck," "termite," "Uniparty Deep stater," "Never Trump sack of dog feces," "avid Bidenista," "filthy Ukrainian," "war whore," "fricking chump," "psychopathic POS," "depraved SOB," "Never Trump Moron," "Lazarus," and "sock puppet."

"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."  ---George Orwell