Should the US navy bring back escort carriers?

Should the US navy bring back escort carriers? We need some way to establish air superiority even when an entire CSG would be an overkill.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Anon the US can literally just fly bombers or jets from fricking Texas to Siberia if they want to, escort carriers are effectively irrelevant with modern tech when you can skip the carrier entirely and still get air superiority.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's much better to have a local floating base that can react to developing situations in real time.

      >bring back escort carriers
      What is amphibious assault ship

      Still too large. I'm talking about something half the displacement that carries maybe 2-3 F35 and a couple helos.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >maybe 2-3 F3
        >air superiority

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It should be enough against a lot of foes. The Bulgarian air force for example has like 20 Mig29 and Su-25s.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The issue is that you're designing something with a capability set so narrow that to be useful you have to pair it with other assets. What environment is having a paltry strike force like 2 F35s going to be important? What situation calls for having that force on immediate call, but doesn't warrant having something larger on site? Do these carriers need escorts of their own? What about sustainment? Marine landing capability? The micro-carrier concept has pretty much never really worked throughout history, with very niche roles exempted.

        It should be enough against a lot of foes. The Bulgarian air force for example has like 20 Mig29 and Su-25s.

        >Bulgaria
        If only the US could operate aircraft in that area without a carrier, right?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Black person 2 F-35s isn't even a real sortie.
        What's the use case where you ever only want to deploy a fricking twoship of jets to a theater and have them based off some tiny ship there?
        The logistical footprint to make an entire ship whose sole purpose is to house a fraction of a wing is way out of proportion.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's all about being modular. You have 10-12 of these things in a theater running minor ops like anti-piracy then as needed they can gather together to form a full F-35 squadron. Much better than sending a Ford class for every little thing.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Send a fricking Ardleigh Burke, 2 choppers on deck and everything else gets a missile.

            The micro ship concept sucks ass because it only has a use on a microscopic level of operation for a comparatively giant investment.
            You still need to operate an entire fricking ship, crew, means to sustain said crew and the ops off the ship when the result of the entire project is a ship that's utterly pointless in a real conflict.

            You can never justify investing in such a ship compared to just sending a couple of jets along with a tanker from 3 countries over.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            if there are ever enough problems that ELEVEN CSG's are not enough to be everywhere they're needed, it doesn't matter at that point. we have enough carriers.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              to be fair, more than half of them are at port going through upgrades and maintenance.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                if you also mean half of the foreign ones, yeah, you're right. i don't think russia's carrier has left port in years.

                https://i.imgur.com/LDh16Un.jpeg

                Good Idea.
                Let's build them about ten years ago.

                this too, ESG's and ARG's could lock down any 'small' conflict. CSG's are basically parking US cities on your coast and daring you to try and fight back.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >not shown on picture is china's 3000+ YJ-21's
              and only 28 ships to shoot.Sad!

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ruh roh sum ting wong

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >YJ-21
                let me know when there's actually something that can't be shot down, because hypersonic aint it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You have 10-12 of these things in a theater
            So now you have half the capability of a supercarrier at 3-4 times the cost. What a stupid-ass idea.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Still too large.
        Modern Amphibious assault ships are just about a s small as you can make a ship and still operate aircraft off of it to any operationally relevant degree.

        Operating aircraft simply takes a lot of space. The smaller you try to build your carrier, the less effective it becomes not only in total terms, but in size:capability ratio.

        >2-3 F-35s
        That's worthless. 2-3 jets cannot establish any kind of air superiority over an appreciable amount of space evne when completely uncontested, simply because of downtime.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >That's worthless. 2-3 jets cannot establish any kind of air superiority over an appreciable amount of space evne when completely uncontested, simply because of downtime.
          Gonna have to hard disagree on this. If you are a shit air force relying on outdated 4th gen Migs, you are not gonna be flying around if you think there's even 1 F-35 in the area.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            i mean some moronic dictator could try to throw up eight or more of those planes to try and outnumber the missiles it carries. i wouldn't bet on them, but the USA doesn't take any risks like that.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >see 8 planes on the radar
              >launch all the missiles and leave
              >go back four hours later and there's 2 planes left

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Air superiority requires presence. You can't get air superiority when you can't have anything in the air more often than not because you're trying to operate half a flight off of a glorified dinghy. Relying on the other side being too scared to play the odds is an extremely foolish thing to do, especially when the odds are in their favour like this.

            At that point you're better off packing a couple SAMs and a decent radar into a corvette. That's gonna give you air superiority more reliably and consistently at least. While also being far cheaper to boot.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >bring back escort carriers
    What is amphibious assault ship

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >overkill
    you must not know much about american military doctrine.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    below having having 1-2 full squadron of fixed wing aircraft the returns in terms of logistics etc. are way worse.

    That said there was a post-falklands concept for a modular aircraft carrier that could be bolted onto a container ship that was taken up from the merchant fleet. This was considered because in a total war scenario all the reserve and OCU training squadrons activated (plus RAF harrier crossdecking) was more than existing deck space which happened in the falklands only like 8 sea harriers from the OCU and 6(?) RAF harriers were able to make it to the theatre of operations. The rest of the Sea Harriers spent the war in Cornwall doing DACT with the French Air Force.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good Idea.
    Let's build them about ten years ago.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      helicopters look more sexy on aircraft carriers than planes do

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the bongs may be mostly moronic.
        but they're not COMPLETELY moronic

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I still can't get over that fricking departures board.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            thats for watching porn inbetween launches

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. I saw the America class and immediately thought "Light Carrier".

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      god zulu cobra looks so awesome.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Escort carriers were a wartime creation that owed their entire existence to the fact that shipyards couldn't churn out military-grade hulls quickly enough to meet demand. They served three major roles: convoy escort duties against submarines, ferrying aircraft overseas, and supporting amphibious invasions where the threat of enemy air and naval power was considered (correctly or incorrectly) to not be an issue.
    In the modern era ASW is performed by helicopters, which don't require a dedicated aircraft carrier to operate, aircraft can be moved long-distances by other means, and no one operates fighters in large quantities that low-capability/low-survivability aircraft carriers are needed.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      well there was also the fact that a real carrier was TOTAL overkill for convoy escort and guarding landing ships.

      You don't need a strike carrier to prosecute the occasional sub. The point of an escort carrier was to provide a real but minimal level of air cover to convoys in open ocean to look out for surfaced subs/spot them from above when at periscope depth moving to attack And also to provide CAP and CAS for amphibious forces without committing an entire real carrier and associated escorts to the effort.

      You dont need 60 aircraft a couple cruisers and maybe a BB to keep subs away.
      A handful of DDs, DDEs and a Light Carrier with 10-20 aircraft is sufficient.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We've been having this debate since the 1970s. SCS just isn't worth the money. Sortie generation is tiny compared to putting the same money into supercarriers. And besides, 'phib flattops, which have other useful roles to play, can run SCS missions on an as-needed basis, especially now that the jarheads have F-35Bs.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *