New Aircraft carriers

Dude that empire film would be so much better with cgi than animations though it would cost more it would apeal more to other ausiences. What about the new possibilities of flying Air craft carriers. Sure its long off but gotta plan for the future of war.



Q: How do you know a mans planning for the future?

A: He buys 2 cases of beer

Any AShCM/LACM capabilities in this new type?

The "Best" carrier would be one with unlimited supplies, capable of appearing and disappearing to/from anywhere in the world instantly, and have shields that protect it from any conceivable weapons system. It could also manipulate space-time to allow crews to work normal shifts (still get sleep) and conduct full-scale flight operations. An all-seeing sensor array would be nice, too.

On the more practical side - you want something highly mobile, independent and self-sufficient, survivable, aware, and to also 'hide', when possible.

To my knowledge - the last objective, there, goes against all of the others. Hiding a floating city is rather difficult (unless you were to try and put it under water.... which is a good idea... but we lack the structural materials to make that a reality).

Also, I don't ever see carriers becoming obsolete. True, we will move to aerospace platforms, and what I hope to be involved in designing some day - but carriers are still incredibly economical by comparison. With some 70+% of the planet covered by water, that is a LOT of space that is available. I could see carriers or fixed oceanic installations being used to launch supplies from the equator into orbit to support aerospace operations.

We will still have a very powerful Navy that still plays around in the water. But, yes, we will move to a Navy that is playing around in the Vacuum of Space. But the "normal" Navy will never be obsolete in function.

reply to post by Daedalus3



Nah, it doesn't really fit in with US carrier doctrine.
Direct striking power is distributed among the escort vessels, the carrier has no offensive capability beyond it's airwing.

The Soviet carriers all had organic strike assets, but they were intended for a different mission than USN carriers.

USN carriers are designed for sustained offshore power projection, so any space that might be used for organic strike capacity is better used as magazine space for the airwing.

The Russian carriers were intended for a different purpose: defending their "boomer bastions" (SSBN patrol areas) against NATO ASW groups and SSN's (with ASW helos). So for that mission, the Russian carriers' built-in striking power is much more useful, and sustained operations less of a priority.