Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Naval Air Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Bigger US Carriers?
jbwill2    6/12/2003 6:12:43 PM
Presently, the US operates 12 fleet supercarriers. These vessels are equipped to handle 80-85 aircraft of various types. Since there currently does not seem to be a large groundswell of support for increasing the number of active US fleet carriers, and considering the difficulty US officials often have in securing overseas basing rights for combat air operations, should the US consider building even bigger carriers to replace the older carriers that will be retired in the future? Would it be feasible, both in terms of cost and manpower, to build and operate a CVN capable of holding approximately 130-140 aircraft? Surely this would give the US better options in warfighting early in a regional conflict, and would allow the USN/Marines to conduct operations much more autonomously. If this is feasible, would the US even have enough aircraft to man the new carriers, or would a major acquisition program have to be initiated? If this is not feasible, then how large of a carrier, and how many aircraft, could the USN realistically operate?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
bsl    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/12/2003 6:23:56 PM
First of all, almost all those carriers are actually capable of operating between 90 and 100 aircraft. The smaller numbers are because of budget limitations. They used to handle more. Second, it's well to keep in mind that, roughly speaking, it takes three carriers to allow you to keep one on station indefinitely. One on station, one on the way to or from deployment, and one being refitted and repaired. You can utilize them at a higher rate, for while, but not over the long run. So, a 12 carrier force implies the ability to have 4 carriers on station at any given moment. That's already thin. Any serious crisis involving a military power more capable than Chad or Vanuatu will probably call for more than one CVBG at a time. IOW, there are good reasons to want to maintain a certain minimum number of decks. It probably would be more cost effective, from an accountant's point of view, to build a million ton ship on which to station the entire fleet air wing. Military and political considerations argue otherwise.
 
Quote    Reply

Shaka of Carthage    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/12/2003 7:48:03 PM
It takes $5 billion and seven years already to build them, I don't think they will be getting bigger. But here is a way that can get "bigger". UCAVs. If we assume a combat version is 2/3rd the size of a manned aircraft, I could take the 48 combat aircraft and put 64 UCAVs in the same space. Here is a typical Combat Air Wing... 24 F-14's 24 F-18's 4 EA-6B's 4 E-2 3 HH-60F 8 S-3 3 SH-60F There is some variation among the F-14's and F-18's, depending on what is avaialbe and whom. Marines are being used to equip carriers because there just are not enough Naval Aviators to equip all the carriers. And as was mentioned, in a pinch you can put more aircraft on there. I think the limit is around 90 or so. And I haven't forgotten to write a topic about what I think they should do with the CVBG's. I'm trying to control my temptation to "transform" the entire Navy as the same time.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/13/2003 2:19:20 AM
Shaka how do you propose to make a UCAV landing at night on a carrier?
 
Quote    Reply

Shaka of Carthage    RE:Bigger US Carriers?    6/13/2003 2:36:06 AM
I have no idea. I would assume that the ability to "see" from the UCAV would be the same way the operator sitting inside the carrier would "see" the deck of the carrier. The Navy has some sort of UCAV that looks like a small B2 right now. Guess there figuring it out now.
 
Quote    Reply

jbwill2    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/13/2003 7:12:41 AM
Since the US fleet carriers can actually handle more aircraft than they currently do, but choose not to for budgetary/manning reasons, is everyone in agreement that 80-85 aircraft is the proper number of deployed aircraft? How about the composition of the air wing? Should the ratios of the various aircraft be changed to focus more/less on a particular mission?
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/13/2003 7:35:42 AM
Shaka: If anybody had a solution for night traps he be a millionaire: It is even scarier than being under fire. It is one of the things i really admire the USNavy for. UCAV attack planes on ships will suffer severe operational limitations. I think the US carriers have about the right size, maybe a bit too large; but much smaller carriers will run into problems mounting the operational volume. Make them any larger, and you end up with old "feet on the ground" problem - a carrier cannot be 2 places at the same time.
 
Quote    Reply

Shaka of Carthage    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/13/2003 9:22:24 AM
Thomas I don't believe the US will build anymore CVNs. We've seen the last of these. A CV can be built in less time and can carry the same number of aircraft. As many pointed out on the papers I've read, because of Aviation Gas, the tankers pull up every 3 or 4 days now. So who cares if its 2 or 3 days in the future? Especially since there are no major threats. Of course, UCAVs will burn less AvGas than manned aircraft, so it does make that nuclear argument all the more compelling. So if they are needed in the future, there is always the possiblity of a CV, 85 aircraft option. And lets not forget the LPD. Its the same size as the "big" European carrier, roughly 60 aircraft. Just because we choose to put VSTOL and helios on them now doesn't mean we can't put UCAVs on them in the future. And those things, along with the attached Marines make alot of sense for the future. jbwill2 I don't think any of us could come up with a better mix than what the US Navy has now. They've been practicing this thing for some time. The aircraft may differ (ie no more F-14s, lot more F-18s), but they seem to have a effective mix.
 
Quote    Reply

macawman    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/13/2003 10:26:14 AM
Shaka how do you propose to make a UCAV landing at night on a carrier? Answer: 3rd generation 3D GPS satelites will be available about the time CVN-21 is operational. The 3rd gen. military GPS is supposed to have an accuracy measured in centimeters.
 
Quote    Reply

Crusader    RE:Bigger US Carriers?- Thomas   6/13/2003 11:18:45 AM
With regards to night landings, my dad always tells horror stories of night landings on the USS Bennington, flying ADs in the Marines. Scary! Todd
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:Bigger US Carriers?   6/13/2003 10:16:04 PM
Shaka, As best I understand, almost everyone is proceeding on the assumption that UAC will assume more and more roles and replace many currently manned aircraft. I've heard less about the Navy than the Air Force in this regard, but I've heard that even the Air Force is contemplating UACs not only for recon and surveillance, but for shock troops leading manned aircraft, supplementing manned aircraft, etc. When even the fighter mafia begins to concede this, I have a feeling we're looking at what may be an unstoppable momentum developing. I have no doubts that UAC will, similarly, come to assume greater and great roles in the navy.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy